Quantcast
Home / Opinion / Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance

Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance

Terrence Oneal Hills appeals from judgments of conviction, entered upon a jury’s verdicts, convicting him of second-degree recklessly endangering safety, endangering safety by use of a dangerous weapon, possessing a firearm while a felon, and bail jumping. He also appeals from an order denying postconviction relief. He claims that the circuit court erred during voir dire by referring to the prospective jurors by number instead of by name and erred again by inadequately instructing the jury in regard to the use of juror numbers. Relatedly, he claims that his trial counsel was ineffective by not objecting to the jury selection procedure or to the circuit court’s explanatory instructions, and he seeks an evidentiary hearing to explore these allegations. As additional grounds for relief, he claims that his trial counsel was ineffective by not objecting to allegedly improper expert testimony and that the circuit court wrongly denied this claim after an evidentiary hearing. Because we conclude that Hills forfeited his direct challenges to the alleged circuit court errors and that he failed to demonstrate any ineffective assistance by trial counsel, we affirm. This opinion will not be published.

2011AP2366-CR State v. Hills

Dist I, Milwaukee County, Martens, Dallet, JJ., Per Curiam

Attorneys: For Appellant: Rosen, Mark S., Waukesha; For Respondent: Loebel, Karen A., Milwaukee; St. John, Rebecca Rapp, Madison

Leave a Comment