Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Criminal Procedure — successive appeals

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//November 26, 2013//

Criminal Procedure — successive appeals

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//November 26, 2013//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — successive appeals

Ronnel Fitzgerald, pro se, appeals from an order denying his second Wis. Stat. § 974.06 motion. The circuit court denied the motion after it determined that Fitzgerald’s claims were procedurally barred by State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis. 2d 168, 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994), and that the “newly discovered evidence” offered was discoverable and should have been raised in Fitzgerald’s first § 974.06 motion. The circuit court further concluded that the remainder of Fitzgerald’s claims were a rehash of claims previously raised, and as such, they could not be relitigated. We affirm. This opinion will not be published.

2013AP189 State v. Fitzgerald

Dist I, Milwaukee County, Borowski, J., Per Curiam

Attorneys: For Appellant: Fitzgerald, Ronnel, pro se; For Respondent: Loebel, Karen A., Milwaukee; Probst, Robert, Madison

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