State v. Robert E. Hammersley, 2022AP263, 1/4/24, District 3 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
This pro se appeal fails due to the well-settled application of a procedural bar against successive litigation.
Hammersley has been trying, without success, to reopen his 1998 drunk driving case for several years via a battery of legal filings. Here, he appeals the circuit court’s denial of two motions filed in 2020 as well as the court’s failure to act on a petition for a writ of coram nobis filed that same year. (¶7). However, COA wastes no time in concluding that all of Hammersley’s issues were previously litigated in earlier postconviction proceedings. (¶11). His efforts to evade this holding are undeveloped and lack merit. (¶¶12-14). As a result of his abuse of the appellate process, COA therefore imposes a sanction requiring Hammersley to satisfy specific criteria before future appellate filings will be accepted by COA. (¶16).
