Explore in-depth analysis
On Point is a judicial analysis blog written by members of the Wisconsin State Public Defenders. It includes cases from the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Supreme Court of Wisconsin, and the Supreme Court of the United States.
Important posts
Ahead in SCOW
Sign up
Sentence Modification — Procedure — Necessity of Motion
State v. Roger S. Walker, 2006 WI 82, affirming as modified summary order For Walker: James Rebholz Issue/Holding: In order to obtain review, a defendant must file a postconviction motion to modify sentence, even if the event was a re-sentencing which came to the same result as originally imposed. ¶37 In the hope of clarifying appellate procedure, we […]
SVP – Post-Disposition – Discharge Petition – Probable Cause Hearing, § 980.09(2) (2001-02)
State v. Robert L. Kruse, 2006 WI App 179, PFR filed 9/11/06 For Kruse: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding1: ¶2 We agree with Kruse that at a probable cause hearing under Wis. Stat. §980.09(2)(a), the role of the circuit court is to determine whether there is plausible testimony or evidence that, if believed, […]
SVP – Post-Disposition – Discharge Petition – Probable Cause Hearing, § 980.09(2)
State v. Christopher L. Combs, 2006 WI App 137, PFR filed, 7/20/06 For Combs: Steven D. Phillips, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether, on a petition for discharge of an SVP commitment, § 980.09(2)(b), the trial court can refuse to hold a hearing where, although the court-appointed expert concludes that the person was not sufficiently predisposed […]
SVP – Post-Disposition – Petition for Discharge Procedure, § 980.09(2)(a) (2006) – Timely Probable Cause Hearing, Due Process
State v. Deryl B. Beyer, 2006 WI 2, on certification; prior history: 2001 WI App 167, cert. denied, Beyer v. Wisconsin, 537 U.S. 1210 (2003) For Beyer: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue1: Whether due process was violated by delay of over 22 months between the time the first annual periodic examination report was […]
Sentence Modification: New Factor, Generally
State v. Wayne Delaney, 2006 WI App 37 Pro se Issue/Holding: ¶7 To have his sentence modified, Delaney must overcome two hurdles. First, he must demonstrate that a new factor exists. If so, he next must demonstrate that the new factor warrants sentence modification. State v. Franklin, 148 Wis. 2d 1, 8, 434 N.W.2d 609 (1989). Whether […]
Sentence — Modification — New Factor: Parole Policy
State v. Wayne Delaney, 2006 WI App 37 Pro se Issue/Holding: Governor Thompson’s 1994 letter to the DOC exhorting pursuit of all available remedies to block release of (pre-TIS) violent offenders reaching their mandatory release date is not a new factor: ¶9 The existence of a new factor must be shown by clear and convincing evidence. Franklin, 148 […]
Sentencing – Review — Articulation of Factors — Defendant’s Character
State v. Donald Odom, 2006 WI App 145 For Odom: Eileen Miller Carter; J.C. Moore, SPD, Milwaukee Trial Issue/Holding: Trial court’s acknowledgement that Odom had been a productive citizen but that his numerous crimes “stood in stark contrast to that past” adequately accounted for Odom’s “positive attributes,” ¶24.
Sentencing – Factors: Guidelines
State v. Donald Odom, 2006 WI App 145 For Odom: Eileen Miller Carter; J.C. Moore, SPD, Milwaukee Trial Issue/Holding: A trial court is not required to follow the sentencing guidelines, but only to explain a departure; the trial court’s explanation for departure (defendant’s lengthy record and reoffending upon release from confinement) was an adequate explanation, ¶26.
Sentencing – Review — Harsh & Excessive, Generally
State v. Jack W. Klubertanz, 2006 WI App 71, PFR filed 4/14/06 For Klubertanz: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether attack on a sentence as harsh and excessive is limited to factors present at the time of sentencing, or may instead be based on post-sentencing events such that as in this instance a claim that […]
Sentencing – Review — Harsh & Excessive – Sexual Assault
State v. Germaine M. Taylor, 2006 WI 22, affirming unpublished summary order For Taylor: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: TIS sentence of 18 years (12 in, 6 out) for child sexual assault, consecutive to 5 year indeterminate sentence for similar offense, was not harsh and excessive, notwithstanding PSI recommendation of 12 years (6 in, 6 out), […]
On Point is sponsored by Wisconsin State Public Defenders. All content is subject to public disclosure. Comments are moderated. If you have questions about this blog, please email [email protected].
On Point provides information (not legal advice) about important developments in the law. Please note that this information may not be up to date. Viewing this blog does not create an attorney-client relationship with the Wisconsin State Public Defender. Readers should consult an attorney for their legal needs.