Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

01-0758 State v. Campbell

By: dmc-admin//December 26, 2001//

01-0758 State v. Campbell

By: dmc-admin//December 26, 2001//

Listen to this article

We agree with Campbell that the Ohio forgery statute is broader than Wisconsin’s, and that looking solely at the language of the Ohio statute would be insufficient to prove that Campbell was guilty of possessing a firearm as a felon. However, we are not limited to considering the language of the statute.

“Rather, we agree with the State that the circuit court was entitled to look at the underlying conduct of Campbell’s conviction….

“Count 1 in the indictment against Campbell in the Ohio conviction stated: ‘Campbell … with purpose to defraud or knowing he was facilitating a fraud, forged a writing of Robert Bouldin without his authority, to wit: his signature on a $350 check.’ Campbell pleaded guilty to this count. A guilty plea carries with it admission of the facts charged against the individual.[Citations]. Campbell thus admitted when he pleaded guilty that he forged a $350 check.

“Forging a check is a felony in Wisconsin. Campbell’s conduct falls under Wis. Stat. § 943.38(1)(a), since the check he forged is a writing ‘whereby legal rights or obligations are created.’… Therefore, because Campbell’s conduct in Ohio would have been a felony if committed in Wisconsin, the trial court properly found Campbell guilty of violating Wis. Stat. § 941.29.”

Judgment affirmed.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

Dist I, Milwaukee County, Konkol, J., Dykman, J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Alexander D. Cossi, Milwaukee

For Respondent: Robert D. Donohoo, Milwaukee; Daniel J. O’Brien, 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