Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Criminal Procedure — successive appeals

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//September 30, 2014//

Criminal Procedure — successive appeals

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//September 30, 2014//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — successive appeals

Justin L. Anderson, pro se, appeals an order denying his motion for postconviction relief brought under Wis. Stat. § 974.06 (2011-12). He alleges that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to seek relief from the joinder of his trial with that of his co-defendant, Paris Billups, following Billups’s testimony during his cross-examination. Anderson alleges that his postconviction counsel was ineffective in turn for failing to challenge trial counsel’s effectiveness. The circuit court determined that the claims are procedurally barred by State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis. 2d 168, 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994), and State v. Tillman, 2005 WI App 71, 281 Wis. 2d 157, 696 N.W.2d 574. We affirm. This opinion will not be published.

2013AP1434 State v. Anderson

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

Attorneys: For Appellant: Anderson, Justin L., pro se; For Respondent: Loebel, Karen A., Milwaukee; Johnson-Karp, Gabe, 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