Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Criminal Procedure – ineffective assistance

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//January 22, 2015//

Criminal Procedure – ineffective assistance

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//January 22, 2015//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Criminal Procedure – ineffective assistance

APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Sauk County: JAMES EVENSON, Judge. Affirmed.

William Berlin appeals an order denying Berlin’s postconviction motion for relief under Wis. Stat. § 974.06 (2011-12).[1] Berlin contends that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at trial when his counsel: failed to object to, and introduced, inadmissible evidence; inadequately prepared for trial; inadequately cross-examined State witnesses; failed to conduct an adequate investigation; and failed to present a reasonable theory of defense. For the reasons set forth below, we reject each of these contentions. Because we reject each of Berlin’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, we also reject Berlin’s claim that the cumulative effect of those errors should undermine our confidence in the outcome of the trial. We affirm.

DISTRICT IV; Sauk County; JAMES EVENSON, Blanchard, P.J., Sherman, Kloppenburg, JJ.

2013AP002817 State v. William E. Berlin

Full Text

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