State v. Donnell Basley, 2006 WI App 253 For Basley: Randall E. Paulson, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding1: The postconviction court erroneously denied without evidentiary hearing Basley’s motion for plea-withdrawal (on Nelson/Bentley rather than Bangert grounds): ¶8 Accompanying Basley’s motion is an affidavit from his postconviction counsel averring that the motion “summarizes … Basley’s expected testimony.” Counsel also acknowledges in the… Read more
29. Postconv. Motions
State v. Andrae D. Howell, 2007 WI 75, reversing 2006 WI App 182 For Howell: Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶74 The Bangert and Nelson/Bentley motions, however, are applicable to different factual circumstances. [47] A defendant invokes Bangert when the plea colloquy is defective; a defendant invokes Nelson/Bentley when the defendant alleges that some factor extrinsic to the plea colloquy, like ineffective assistance of counsel or coercion… Read more
State v. James E. Brown, 2006 WI 100, reversing summary order For Brown: Richard D. Martin, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: On the particular facts (illiterate defendant, no written questionnaire, perfunctory colloquy) the defendant was entitled to a Bangert hearing on whether the understood the nature of the rights waived by his guilty plea. With respect to waiver of right to… Read more
State v. James E. Brown, 2006 WI 100, reversing summary order For Brown: Richard D. Martin, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: The defendant demonstrated a prima facie showing that his guilty plea was inadequate, where he was illiterate (such that a plea questionnaire wasn’t even prepared) and the trial court’s colloquy was superficial, ¶¶53-58. The facts are sufficiently extreme… Read more
State v. Thomas A. Mikulance, 2006 WI App 69 Pro se Issue/Holding: A “narrow” exception to the serial litigation bar of § 974.06(4) and State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis. 2d 168, 185, 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994) is established by State v. Flowers, 221 Wis. 2d 20, 27, 586 N.W.2d 175 (Ct. App. 1998), which “applies… Read more
State v. Ricky J. Fortier, 2006 WI App 11 Issue/Holding: Fortier’s failure to respond to no merit report does not, under the circumstances, work serial litigation bar to subsequent, arguably meritorious challenge to sentence: ¶15 Fortier contends that he should not be precluded from raising the issue of a sentence illegally raised upon resentencing, even… Read more
State v. Ralph D. Armstrong, 2005 WI 119, reversing unpublished decision For Armstrong: Jerome Buting; Barry Scheck Issue/Holding: Supreme court has both statutory and inherent authority to order new trial in the interest of justice, even on collateral review (as opposed to direct appeal), ¶¶119-24. (State v. Allen, 159 Wis. 2d 53, 464 N.W.2d 426… Read more
State v. James M. Moran, 2005 WI 115, reversing unpublished decision For Moran: Colleen D. Ball, State Bar Pro Bono Project Issue/Holding: ¶3 We conclude that the plain language of § 974.07(6) gives a movant the right to conduct DNA testing of physical evidence that is in the actual or constructive possession of a government… Read more
