State v. Donald Odom, 2006 WI App 145
For Odom: Eileen Miller Carter; J.C. Moore, SPD, Milwaukee Trial
Issue/Holding: The requirement of sentencing after probation revocation that the judge review the original sentencing transcript, State v. Reynolds, 2002 WI App 15, 249 Wis. 2d 798, 643 N.W.2d 165 (Ct. App. 2001), does not apply to reconfinement after revocation of extended supervision, State v. Brandon E. Jones, 2005 WI App 259. Instead, reconfinement is reviewed under State v. John C. Brown, 2006 WI App 44, ¶17, whose requirements were met. ¶¶30-32.
There’s a strong argument to be made that Brown has overruled Jones and Odom on the idea that the reconfinement court’s failure to review the sentencing transcript is categorically proper, ¶¶20-22. And, the Odom analysis is likewise very dubious to the extent it encourages a truncated reconfinement decision along with stinted appellate review.
