Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

02-0545-CR State v. Barber

By: dmc-admin//April 7, 2003//

02-0545-CR State v. Barber

By: dmc-admin//April 7, 2003//

Listen to this article

Roger Barber appeals a judgment convicting him, after retrial, of burglary of a building or dwelling by use of a dangerous weapon. He also appeals an order denying his postconviction motion for sentence modification. Barber contends that he was entitled to have the case dismissed because the State waited over a year to pursue a new trial following remand from this court, that a substitute witness should have been barred from testifying, and that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion by increasing his sentence after the new trial. We conclude that there was no statutory or constitutional speedy trial violation and that the trial court properly allowed the substitute witness to testify.

However, because the State concedes that the trial court failed to cite sufficient justification for increasing Barber’s sentence, we remand for the limited purpose of resentencing.

This opinion will not be published.

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

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Timothy T. Kay, Brookfield

For Respondent: Robert D. Donohoo, Milwaukee; Michael R. Klos, 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