State v. Lord L. Sturdivant, 2009 WI App 5, PFR filed 1/13/09 For Sturdivant: Steven D. Phillips, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶8 Due process “requires that vindictiveness against a defendant for having successfully attacked his first conviction must play no part in the sentence he receives after a new trial.” North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711… Read more
7. Resentencing
State v. Lorenzo Wood, 2007 WI App 190, PFR filed 8/16/07 For Wood: Michael D. Kaiser Issue/Holding: ¶6 “When a resentencing is required for any reason, the initial sentence is a nullity; it ceases to exist.” Carter, 208 Wis. 2d at 154. In resentencing “the court imposes a new sentence after the initial sentence has been held… Read more
State v. Lorenzo Wood, 2007 WI App 190, PFR filed 8/16/07 For Wood: Michael D. Kaiser Issue/Holding: ¶7 Counsel for Wood points out that published opinions have been somewhat imprecise in distinguishing between the requirements for, and effect of, sentence modification as opposed to resentencing. We acknowledge that language has, on occasion, been imprecise. … …… Read more
State v. Ronnie L. Thums, 2006 WI App 173 For Thums: Paul G. LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: The remedy for a sentence imposed under an incorrect penalty scheme is resentencing: ¶14 Both parties agree that if the sentence the circuit court imposed was improper, Thums is entitled to be resentenced as to both components of… Read more
State v. Frederick W. Prager, 2005 WI App 95 For Prager: Daniel P. Fay Issue: Whether, six days after original sentencing and imposition of probation, the State’s proffered new factor (that defendant had quitclaimed the jointly owned farm to his wife) supported a modification to an active prison term. Holding: Although the term of probation was… Read more
State v. Victor Naydihor, 2004 WI 43, affirming 2002 WI App 272, 258 Wis. 2d 746, 654 N.W.2d 479 For Naydihor: Philip J. Brehm Issue1: Whether an increase in sentence (from 3 to 5 years’ initial confinement), after resentencing before a different judge due to a plea bargain violation, was presumptively vindictive and therefore violated due process. Holding1: Under… Read more
State v. Wallace I. Stenzel, 2004 WI App 181 For Stenzel: Martin E. Kohler Issue/Holding: ¶5, n. 2: “Technically, Stenzel is seeking a modification of a sentence imposed by an erroneous exercise of discretion; resentencing is only available if the initial sentence is vacated because it was illegally imposed. State v. Carter, 208 Wis. 2d 142, 146-47… Read more
State v. Brandon L. Mason, 2004 WI App 176 For Dawson: Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: Where the term of initial confinement exceeds the permissible maximum, based on the rule that this term may not exceed 75% of the total sentence, the error is not harmless even though the term is less than the maximum… Read more
