Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

2. Oral Pronouncement vs. JOC

State v. Charles A. McIntyre, 2014AP800-CR, District 3, 12/30/14 (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity When pronouncing sentence in McIntyre’s case the circuit court repeatedly interchanged “consecutive” and “concurrent” when referring to Count One (of five). (¶¶2-5). Thus, despite the court’s several attempts at clarification during the sentencing hearing, the sentence imposed on that count was… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Craig C. Meier, 2013AP2863-CR, District 4, 7/17/14 (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity The answer matters: If the pronouncement of sentence is ambiguous the court could “clarify[] and “reimpose[]” the sentences it originally intended, Krueger v. State, 86 Wis. 2d 435, 442-43, 272 N.W.2d 847 (1979); if the sentence is illegal, it must be commuted to the lawful maximum, § 973.13. In this… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Probation Search

State v. Seneca Joseph Boykin, 2009AP2499-CR, District 2, 9/22/10 court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Boykin: Mark A. Schoenfeldt; BiC; Resp. A probation agent may not evade the warrant requirement by acting as a “stalking horse” for the police in conducting a warrantless search of a probationer’s residence, ¶10. In this instance, probation… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Carla L. Oglesby, 2006 WI App 95 For Oglesby: Timothy T. Kay Issue/Holding: ¶15      … [T]he trial court’s oral pronouncement imposed a two-year term of probation in 2004CM401. Despite this clear and unequivocal statement, the judgment of conviction recited a probation term of six years. ¶16      When an unambiguous oral pronouncement at sentencing… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Carla L. Oglesby, 2006 WI App 95 For Oglesby: Timothy T. Kay Issue/Holding: The test for statutory construction – whether the language is capable of being understood by reasonably informed persons in different ways – applies to determination of a sentencing court’s intent; where the parties staked out different sentencing positions but the sentencing… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Edward W. Fisher, 2005 WI App 175 For Fisher: Eileen Miller Carter Issue/Holding:  ¶16            Fisher’s contentions grossly misrepresent the record. Assuming the court’s oral ruling contained some ambiguity, the written judgment of conviction and the conditions of extended supervision are crystal clear with respect to what conduct the conditions cover. See Jackson v. Gray, 212 Wis… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Gabriel L. Ortiz, 2001 WI App 215 For Ortiz: Eileen A. Hirsch, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: “(W)here there is conflict between a trial court’s oral pronouncement and a written judgment, the oral pronouncement controls.” ¶27, citing State v. Perry, 136 Wis. 2d 92, 114, 401 N.W.2d 748 (1987). This rule is applicable even though “the… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Robert John Prihoda, 2000 WI 123, 239 Wis. 2d 244, 618 N.W.2d 857, affirming unpublished decision For Prihoda: Timothy T. Kay Issue1: “(W)hether the office of the clerk of circuit court may correct a clerical error in the sentence portion of a written judgment of conviction without prior court approval.” ¶3. Holding1: ¶5: (W)e… Read More

{ 0 comments }