State v. Edward W. Fisher, 2005 WI App 175 For Fisher: Eileen Miller Carter Issue/Holding: ¶16 Fisher’s contentions grossly misrepresent the record. Assuming the court’s oral ruling contained some ambiguity, the written judgment of conviction and the conditions of extended supervision are crystal clear with respect to what conduct the conditions cover. See Jackson v. Gray, 212 Wis… Read more
Published 2005
State v. Lonnie C. Davis, 2005 WI App 98 For Davis: Pamela Moorshead Issue/Holding: ¶24 Davis next contends that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion when it imposed consecutive sentences without an adequate explanation of why that was the minimum amount of time necessary. We reject this claim.¶25 The trial court explained why the… Read more
State v. Brandon J. Matke, 2005 WI App 4, PFR filed 1/6/05 For Matke: James B. Connell Issue/Holding: ¶17. Finally, Matke argues that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion when it ordered, without explanation, that Matke’s present sentence be consecutive to any other sentences he was then serving. … ¶18. The sole infirmity that Matke cites… Read more
State v. Edward W. Fisher, 2005 WI App 175 For Fisher: Eileen Miller Carter Issue/Holding: ¶21 Fisher argues that the circuit court did not satisfy the mandate in State v. Gallion, 2004 WI 42, 270 Wis. 2d 535, ¶¶39, 76, 678 N.W.2d 197, that the court exercise its discretion on a “rational and explainable basis.” We… Read more
State v. James L. Montroy, 2005 WI App 230 For Montroy: Jay E. Heit; Stephanie L. Finn Issue/Holding: Wisconsin discretionary guideline regime is not governed by the holdings of Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), and United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), ¶¶20-24. The latter cases are implicated only when a… Read more
State v. James L. Montroy, 2005 WI App 230 For Montroy: Jay E. Heit; Stephanie L. Finn Issue/Holding: ¶13 Montroy also argues that the PSI improperly included two of his juvenile adjudications, when there was no evidence that he was represented by counsel. [5] The State concedes that the Department of Corrections guidelines mandate that unrepresented juvenile… Read more
State v. Eduardo Jose Trigueros, 2005 WI App 112 For Trigueros: Eileen Miller Carter Issue: Whether the trial court erroneously exercised sentencing discretion by placing too much weight on the need to protect the public, by placing defendant on probation with one year in the House of Correction, on possession with intent to deliver one gram… Read more
State v. Lonnie C. Davis, 2005 WI App 98 For Davis: Pamela Moorshead Issue: Whether the sentencing court erroneously exercised discretion by failing to consider the defendant’s youthfulness (14 years 9 months) at the time he committed the sexual assaults. Holding: ¶16 A review of the sentencing transcript demonstrates that the trial court did not erroneously… Read more
