State v. Tony G. Longmire, 2004 WI App 90 For Longmire: Charles B. Vetzner, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether the sentencing court erroneously exercised discretion, or violated equal protection, in setting an excessive length of extended supervision so as to ensure that the defendant satisfies the restitution order. Holding: “¶39. We conclude that the trial court’s sentencing… Read more
Published 2004
State v. Wallace I. Stenzel, 2004 WI App 181 For Stenzel: Martin E. Kohler Issue/Holding: ¶21. Finally, Stenzel asserts that the court erroneously exercised its discretion because the sentence is unduly harsh and unconscionable. When a defendant argues that his or her sentence is unduly harsh or excessive, we will hold that the sentencing court… Read more
State v. Keith M. Carey , 2004 WI App 83, PFR filed 4/22/04 For Carey: Paul LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶10. Pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 971.14(5)(a), if the court finds that a defendant is not competent, but is likely to become competent, it may commit the defendant to the custody of the department of… Read more
State v. David Arredondo, 2004 WI App 7, PFR filed 1/22/04 For Arredondo: James A. Rebholz Issue/Holding: ¶11. A defendant’s right to testify is a fundamental constitutional right. State v. Simpson, 185 Wis. 2d 772, 778, 519 N.W.2d 662, 663 (Ct. App. 1994). A defendant may, however, waive the right to testify. State v. Wilson… Read more
State ex rel. David C. Myers v. Swenson, 2004 WI App 224, PFR filed 11/24/04 For Myers: Christopher T. Sundberg; Bruce D. Huibregtse Issue/Holding: ¶8. Myers appears to argue that the Wisconsin courts retain the ability to conduct certiorari review of a Wisconsin inmate’s due process or equal protection challenge to a disciplinary action, even… Read more
State v. Christopher Swiams, 2004 WI App 217 For Swiams: Jefren E. Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶8. … The State contends, however, that reconfinement orders may only be reviewed via common-law certiorari and not under Wis. Stat. Rule 809.30. It relies on State v. Bridges, 195 Wis. 2d 254, 536 N.W.2d 153 (Ct. App… Read more
State v. Wallace I. Stenzel, 2004 WI App 181 For Stenzel: Martin E. Kohler Issue/Holding: ¶6. In State v. Gallion, 2004 WI 42, 270 Wis. 2d 535, 678 N.W.2d 197, the Wisconsin Supreme Court revisited the seminal case in sentencing jurisprudence, McCleary v. State, 49 Wis. 2d 263, 182 N.W.2d 512 (1971) …¶7. The appellate standard… Read more
State v. David Arredondo, 2004 WI App 7, PFR filed 1/22/04 For Arredondo: James A. Rebholz Issue/Holding: ¶54. It is “‘well established that a sentencing judge may take into account facts introduced at trial relating to other charges, even ones of which the defendant has been acquitted.’” United States v. Watts, 519 U.S. 148, 152 (1997) (per curiam)… Read more
