State v. Jeffrey D. Knickmeier, 2011AP368-CR, District 4, 11/25/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); pro se; case activity
The court upholds the sentence – 2, concurrent 6-month jail terms for theft by bailee – of disbarred attorney Knickmeier. The court patiently discusses each of Knickmeier’s challenges to sentencing discretion (some of which, to be blunt, seem frivolous), and concludes:
¶12 In summary, Knickmeier has not shown that the circuit court erroneously exercised its sentencing discretion. The court’s comments show that it considered the factors that Knickmeier advanced to show that no further punishment was warranted, and it explained the reasons it disagreed with Knickmeier. The court explained the factors that led it to conclude a six-month jail sentence was warranted: the seriousness of the crimes, the failure to take personal responsibility, and the failure to successfully complete probation. The court gave the most weight to the seriousness of the crime. These are proper sentencing factors and the weight to give them was for the court to decide.
