99-1940-CR State v. Peters

By: dmc-admin//July 2, 2001//

Listen to this article

Here, defendant was charged with fifth offense operating after revocation of license (OAR). In order to prevent the progressively higher penalties that flow from repeat OAR offenses, he moved to invalidate his second OAR conviction, alleging that the no contest plea upon which it was based was entered without counsel by closed-circuit television from the county jail, in violation of his statutory and constitutional rights.

We view this case as falling within the right-to-counsel exception. We do not address the defendant’s challenge to the constitutionality of closed-circuit television guilty or no contest pleas. We reverse and remand for consideration of whether defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to counsel before pleading no contest to second offense OAR.

Reversed and remanded.

Review of a Decision of the Court of Appeals, Sykes, J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Jane Krueger Smith, Oconto Falls

For Respondent: William L. Gansner, Madison

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event