State v. Ronnie L. Thums, 2006 WI App 173 For Thums: Paul G. LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether an offense which was partially committed during the TIS-I regime but not completed until advent of TIS-II comes under the former or latter sentencing regime. Holding: ¶11 Thums had not committed the crime of stalking with a… Read more
H. Modification/Review
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
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
State v. Germaine M. Taylor, 2006 WI 22, affirming unpublished summary order For Taylor: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶17 The standards governing appellate review of an imposed sentence are well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
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
State v. Donald Odom, 2006 WI App 145 For Odom: Eileen Miller Carter; J.C. Moore, SPD, Milwaukee Trial Issue/Holding: Trial court’s discussion of the three primary sentencing factors was adequate, though the court did not explicitly identify those factors, ¶25. … Read more
State v. Jeremy D. Russ, 2006 WI App 9 For Russ: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶14 This court observes a strong policy of deferring to the sentencing discretion of a trial court, presuming the sentence to be reasonable unless the defendant can demonstrate from the record that the court acted unreasonably. State v… Read more
State v. Carla L. Oglesby, 2006 WI App 95 For Oglesby: Timothy T. Kay Issue/Holding: ¶15 … [T]he trial court’s oral pronouncement imposed a two-year term of probation in 2004CM401. Despite this clear and unequivocal statement, the judgment of conviction recited a probation term of six years. ¶16 When an unambiguous oral pronouncement at sentencing… Read more
