Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

2. Presentence Report

State v. Melton, 2013 WI 65, reversing published court of appeals decision; case activity; opinion by Justice Prosser; concurrence by Justice Ziegler and joined by Chief Justice Abrahamson and Justice Bradley Melton pled guilty to 2 felonies, and the court ordered a PSI for sentencing.  Turns out the PSI contained errors (info re uncharged offenses)… Read More

{ 0 comments }

In the Matter of State v. Michael Buchanan: State ex rel. Office of State Public Defender v. Wis. Court of Appeals, District IV, 2013 WI 31, on review of petition for supervisory writ; case activity In an important decision for all lawyers who handle criminal cases in the state appellate courts, the supreme court affirms… Read More

{ 0 comments }

on review of published decision; case activity Issue (composed by On Point)  Whether a circuit court has inherent authority to order destruction of a presentence investigation report (albeit under “unique facts”), after sentencing and entry of judgment. And as to those unique facts? The PSI at issue contained information about uncharged offenses that the trial court determined… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Brandon M. Melton, 2012 WI App 95, WSC review granted 11/14/12(recommended for publication), supreme court review granted 11/14/12; case activity Under “unique facts,” the circuit court possessed inherent authority to order destruction of a PSI: the PSI contained uncharged offenses irrelevant to sentencing whose inclusion was improper under DOC rules; and, though sealed, it coexisted with a second… Read More

{ 0 comments }

court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Sterling: Dianne M. Erickson; BiC; Resp.; Reply Charging Decision – Judicial Involvement Increase in the charge, following trial judge’s veiled suggestion to the prosecutor that such an increase would be appropriate, wasn’t occasioned by judicial interference with prosecutorial discretion, ¶¶16-22. Initially charged with first-degree reckless… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Donald W. Thexton, 2007 WI App 11, PFR filed 1/02/07 For Thexton: Kirk B. Obear Issue/Holding: The rule of State v. David W. Suchocki, 208 Wis. 2d 509, 561 N.W.2d 332 (Ct. App. 1997) (conflict of interest where PSI author married to defendant’s prosecutor) does not extend to situation where PSI author is married to another… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Presentence Report – Miranda Warnings

State v. Donald W. Thexton, 2007 WI App 11, PFR filed 1/02/07 For Thexton: Kirk B. Obear Issue/Holding: Thexton wasn’t entitled to Miranda warnings “at the time the PSI was being prepared”: ¶8        Thexton also claims that Streekstra violated his Fifth Amendment rights when he interviewed him during the investigation.  Thexton claims that Streekstra used the prior PSI as… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Presentence Report – Right to Counsel

State v. Donald W. Thexton, 2007 WI App 11, PFR filed 1/02/07 For Thexton: Kirk B. Obear Issue/Holding: The agent’s use of a prior PSI during the interview of defendant for the current case did not trigger any additional right to counsel: ¶10      Thexton further argues that his right to counsel was violated because he was unable to consult… Read More

{ 0 comments }