01-0230 State v. Sveum

Listen to this article

“Because Sveum’s conviction for violating an injunction issued under Wis. Stat. § 813.125(4) is a criminal conviction, we further conclude that the circuit court properly sentenced him as a repeater. …

“[And], because the crime of violating an injunction issued under Wis. Stat. § 813.125(4) and the crime of violating Wis. Stat. § 947.013(1r) each require proof of an element that the other does not, we conclude that violating a harassment injunction is not a lesser-included offense of harassment under § 947.013(1r). The two offenses are not identical in law.”

Accordingly, defendant’s prosecution for violating both statutes did not implicate double jeopardy rights.

“Because we conclude that violating a harassment injunction is a crime and that it is not a lesser-included offense of Wis. Stat. § 947.013(1r), we affirm the circuit court’s order denying Sveum’s motion for postconviction relief.”

Order affirmed.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

Dist IV, Dane County, Sumi, J., Roggensack, J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Michael A. Sveum, Oneida; Ian A.J. Pitz, Madison

For Respondent: David J. Becker, Madison; Robert J. Kaiser Jr., Madison