01-0817-CR State v. Love

By: dmc-admin//December 17, 2001//

Listen to this article

Lisimba Love appeals from an amended judgment of conviction entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of armed robbery as a party to a crime and as a habitual criminal. He also appeals from an order denying his postconviction motions for a Machner hearing and for resentencing. Love claims that: (1) his trial counsel was ineffective because she failed to object to the prosecutor’s references to the preliminary examination during the trial and because she failed to object to the prosecutor’s suggestion that the jury consider allegedly extraneous factors; (2) the trial court erred when it denied Love’s request to admit his offer to take a polygraph test; and (3) the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion when it imposed what he claims is an unduly harsh sentence.

We affirm.

This opinion will not be published.

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

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Mark S. Rosen, Waukesha

For Respondent: Robert D. Donohoo, Milwaukee; Christian R. Larsen, Madison

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event