Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

A. Type pf PCM

State v. Jose A. Reas-Mendez, 2017AP2452-CR, 12/11/18, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) In 2017, conservative activists on SCOW overruled a 12-year-old, unanimous opinion in order to overwrite the plain language of §974.07(7), Wisconsin’s postconviction DNA testing statute. They made it virtually impossible for a defendant to get this type of testing… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Howard D. Davis, 2017AP942-CR, District 1, 12/11/18 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) Davis claimed trial counsel was ineffective in various ways, and that a juror may have introduced extraneous information into deliberations. The trial court denied his claims without a hearing. The court of appeals affirms. A postconviction motion provides… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Steven L. Buckingham, 2017AP1852-CR, 12/4/18, District 1 (not recommended for publication), case activity (including briefs). When the court of appeals’ dismisses an appellant’s arguments on the grounds that they are “conclusory,” it’s always wise to check the briefs. In this case,  Buckingham filed a fully-developed, well-organized 42-page brief in chief presenting 5 claims… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Rafael D. Newson, 2018AP551, 9/18/18, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) Newson claims that his trial and postconviction lawyers were ineffective for failing to raise lack of jurisdiction caused by the State’s failure to file its complaint against him before he was extradited to Arizona. He also argued that the… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Darrick L. Bennett, 2016AP2209-CR, 9/18/18, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) Bennett was charged with 1st degree intentional homicide, but pled guilty to 1st degree reckless homicide. In a decision turning on facts specific to this case, the court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision denying (a) plea… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Defense attorneys hear an awful lot about the “importance of finality” in criminal cases–especially at the §974.06 stage of proceedings. What about the victims? What about the waste of additional judicial resources? There must be a stopping point! Do those arguments really make sense if the wrong person was convicted? The latest edition of The… Read More

{ 0 comments }

SCOW’s recent decision in State v. Jeffrey Denny, which restricted the availability of postconviction DNA testing in Wisconsin, was a real heart-breaker. Essentially, SCOW held that to get state-funded DNA testing the defendant has to prove the results would conclusively remove him from the scene of the crime. In a decision the EvidenceProf Blog calls a… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Daniel G. Scheidell, 2015AP1598-CR, 3/29/17, District 2 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) Congrats to the Remington Center for a winning a new trial in the interests of justice based on newly-discovered, 3rd-party perpetrator evidence 19 years after Scheidell was convicted of 1st degree sexual assault and armed robbery. Even better… Read More

{ 1 comment }