Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

Challenges to sentences procedurally barred

State v. War Nakula-Reginald Marion, 2019AP2206-CR & 2019AP2207-CR, District 1, 5/11/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)

Marion was given maximum consecutive sentences on multiple misdemeanor convictions, all consecutive to the reconfinement ordered after his ES in a prior case was revoked due to the new convictions. Appointed postconviction counsel filed a no-merit appeal under § 809.32 and the court of appeals affirmed the convictions. Before and during the no-merit appeal, Marion filed a number of pro se motions challenging his sentences, among other things. This appeal involves a recent motion for “Time Served with Concurrent Sentences.” The court holds the motion is procedurally barred because it raises the same or substantially similar issues raised in prior pro se motions, State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis. 2d 168, 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994), and because his convictions were affirmed in the no-merit appeal, State v. Allen, 2010 WI 89, 328 Wis. 2d 1, 786 N.W.2d 124. To the extent Marion is aggrieved by the computation of his sentence, he must raise the issue with DOC or by a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

Facebooktwitterlinkedinmail
{ 0 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment