Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

00-2870-CR State v. Lisney

By: dmc-admin//September 10, 2001//

00-2870-CR State v. Lisney

By: dmc-admin//September 10, 2001//

Listen to this article

Douglas Lisney appeals from a judgment convicting him of disorderly conduct while using a dangerous weapon, and from a subsequent order denying his motion for postconviction relief. Lisney argues that he is entitled to a new trial because he was denied his right to a fair trial and because he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Lisney contends his right to a fair trial was violated because: (1) the prosecutor asked questions, with no good faith basis, implying that Lisney attempted to influence another witness; (2) the prosecutor vouched for the credibility of the victim during closing arguments; (3) the trial court denied his request to exclude the victim from the courtroom during the trial; and (4) the prosecutor failed to disclose exculpatory and impeachment evidence, pursuant to the duties detailed in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). In addition, Lisney contends that his trial counsel violated his right to effective assistance of counsel when he failed to: (1) object to the prosecutor’s alleged misconduct and move for a mistrial; (2) call a witness that Lisney claims was key to his defense; and (3) request a jury instruction both on defense of others and on allowing the jury to consider a witness’ prior convictions when assessing his credibility.

We conclude that there was no prosecutorial misconduct, the trial court properly refused to exclude the victim from the courtroom, and trial counsel provided effective assistance.

Accordingly, we affirm.

Not recommended for publication in the official reports.

Dist IV, Richland County, Kirchman, J., Dykman, J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Edward J. Hunt, Milwaukee; Kathleen M. Quinn, Milwaukee; Margaret S. O’Connor, Milwaukee

For Respondent: Wm. Andrew Sharp, Richland Center; Erik C. Peterson, Dodgeville

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests