00-3264-CR State v. Bullard

By: dmc-admin//October 8, 2001//

Listen to this article

Barry Bullard appeals a judgment of conviction, entered after a jury trial, on eight drug charges and an order denying postconviction relief. Bullard argues (1) that portions of the second amended information should be dismissed because there was no preliminary hearing; (2) that counts 1 and 2 are multiplicitous; (3) that he was denied effective assistance of counsel; (4) that the trial court erred by allowing inadmissible hearsay; and (5) that insufficient evidence supports the identity and quantities of marijuana in this case.

We disagree with Bullard’s contentions and affirm the judgment and order.

This opinion will not be published.

Dist III, Eau Claire County, Proctor, J., Per Curiam

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Jane K. Smith, Oconto Falls

For Respondent: Raymond L. Pelrine, Eau Claire; Christopher G. Wren, Madison

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event