By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//September 30, 2014//
Wisconsin Court of Appeals
Criminal
Criminal Procedure — successive appeals
Emmett Dunlap appeals an order denying his Wis. Stat. § 974.06 motion for a new trial. The circuit court denied Dunlap’s motion without an evidentiary hearing, concluding Dunlap failed to assert a sufficient reason for failing to raise his arguments previously, as required by State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis. 2d 168, 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994). Dunlap argues his appellate attorney’s ineffective assistance and Dunlap’s unawareness of the potential issues constituted sufficient reasons. We reject Dunlap’s argument, and affirm. This opinion will not be published.
Dist I, Milwaukee County, Wagner, J., Per Curiam
Attorneys: For Appellant: Richards, Mark D., Racine; Dimmer, Brian P., Racine; For Respondent: Gansner, William L., Madison; Loebel, Karen A., Milwaukee