≡ Menu

C. Factors

Presentence Report – Right to Counsel

State v. Donald W. Thexton, 2007 WI App 11, PFR filed 1/02/07 For Thexton: Kirk B. Obear Issue/Holding: The agent’s use of a prior PSI during the interview of defendant for the current case did not trigger any additional right to counsel: ¶10      Thexton further argues that his right to counsel was violated because he was unable to consult… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Germaine M. Taylor, 2006 WI 22, affirming unpublished summary order For Taylor: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶28 In terms of the length of his sentence, Taylor argues that there appeared to be no “starting point” for the court of some very low period of confinement, or even the period of confinement recommended… Read more

{ 0 comments }

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… Read more

{ 0 comments }

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… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Review – Exercise of Discretion – Generally

State v. Jack W. Klubertanz, 2006 WI App 71, PFR filed 4/14/06 For Klubertanz: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶21      We conclude that the circuit court here properly exercised its sentencing discretion under the standards set forth in Gallion. The court identified the objectives it sought to achieve with the sentence it imposed: punishing Klubertanz… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Chad W. Ziegler, 2006 WI App 49, PFR filed 3/13/06 For Ziegler: Kenneth P. Casey, UW Law School Issue/Holding: ¶23      The principal objectives of a sentence include, but are not limited to, the protection of the community, the punishment of the defendant, rehabilitation of the defendant, and deterrence to others. Id., ¶40. A sentencing court… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Germaine M. Taylor, 2006 WI 22, affirming unpublished summary order For Taylor: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶17        The standards governing appellate review of an imposed sentence are well settled. [9] A circuit court exercises its discretion at sentencing, and appellate review is limited to determining if the court’s discretion was erroneously exercised. … ¶27     … Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Steven A. Harvey, 2006 WI App 26 For Harvey: Christopher William Rose Issue/Holding: ¶47      Harvey correctly states Gallion’s teaching that probation should be considered as the first sentencing alternative. Gallion, 270 Wis.  2d 535, ¶25. Here, the trial court expressly addressed probation. … In sum, the court concluded that probation would unduly depreciate the offense… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS