On Point blog, page 1 of 1
7th Circuit denies habeas relief to Wisconsin prisoner claiming vindictive prosecution, IAC and a 6th amendment violation
Rodney Lass v. Jason Wells, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals No. 23-2880, 6/26/24
Lass was charged with multiple felony counts after his first trial on misdemeanor domestic abuse charges ended in a mistrial. During state postconviction and appeal proceedings, he raised claims of vindictive prosecution, ineffective assistance, and violation of his 6th amendment rights. The 7th Circuit denied relief as to Lass’s IAC and 6th amendment claims as procedurally defaulted, and rejects the vindictive prosecution claim because the Wisconsin courts already considered and reasonably rejected Lass’s same “fact-based arguments.”
Prosecutorial Vindictiveness: Not Found Following Rejected Plea Offer; Search & Seizure Exclusionary Rule: Inapplicable to Private Search
State v. Troy L. Cameron, 2012 WI App 93 (recommended for publication); case activity
Prosecutorial Vindictiveness – Neither Presumptive or Actual for Increased Charges Following Rejected Plea Offer
Cameron failed to establish prosecutorial vindictiveness in the filing of an amended information containing additional charges, after he rejected a plea offer to the original information. State v. Johnson, 2000 WI 12, 232 Wis.
Due Process – Judicial Vindictiveness – Resentencing (Following Successful Attack on Conviction), Generally
State v. Lord L. Sturdivant, 2009 WI App 5, PFR filed 1/13/09
For Sturdivant: Steven D. Phillips, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding:
¶8 Due process “requires that vindictiveness against a defendant for having successfully attacked his first conviction must play no part in the sentence he receives after a new trial.” North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 725 (1969),