State v. Chavis T. Sheriff, 2011AP1202, District 2, 7/25/12
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Sheriff’s failure to respond to a no-merit report operates as a serial litigation bar to his subsequent, § 974.06 attempt to argue that trial and postconviction counsel were ineffective. State v. Allen, 2010 WI 89, 328 Wis. 2d 1, 786 N.W.2d 124, discussed and applied.
¶13 Sheriff has failed to allege anything that would undermine our confidence that this court complied with Anders when we accepted the no-merit report and affirmed Sheriff’s convictions. He also has not provided a “sufficient reason” as to why he did not raise his ineffective assistance of trial counsel argument in response to the no-merit report. As Sheriff’s claims are procedurally barred, and as he has presented nothing more than meritless “conclusory allegations” that his trial and postconviction counsel were ineffective, we need not consider his substantive arguments. The order of the circuit court denying his postconviction motion is affirmed.
