99-1666-CR, 00-0802-CR State v. LeRose

By: dmc-admin//December 10, 2001//

Listen to this article

Paul Alan LeRose appeals pro se from a judgment of conviction of two counts of theft by fraud and from an order denying his motion for postconviction relief. The conviction arises out of LeRose’s billing practices for services rendered to the Office of the State Public Defender (SPD) as a contract attorney. While LeRose identifies nine separate issues on appeal, only two predominant themes exist: that he is innocent because double billing was permitted under his contract with the SPD and that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction because there was no direct evidence of legal work billed but not performed. He also claims that he was denied the effective assistance of trial counsel.

We reject these and other arguments made by LeRose and affirm the judgment and order.

This opinion will not be published.

Dist II, Racine County, Gibbs, J., Per Curiam

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Paul A. LeRose, Fox River Grove, Ill.

For Respondent: Robert S. Flancher, Racine; Edwin J. Hughes, Madison

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event