Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

02-2625-CR State v. Yang

By: dmc-admin//May 20, 2003//

02-2625-CR State v. Yang

By: dmc-admin//May 20, 2003//

Listen to this article

Nou Yang appeals from a judgment entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of substantial battery, with the intent to cause bodily harm, as an habitual offender. He also appeals from an order denying his postconviction motion to vacate his judgment and sentence. Yang claims that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion when it: (1) admitted the victim’s statement into evidence under the excited-utterance exception to the hearsay rule; and (2) rejected a proposed plea bargain that would have amended the substantial-battery charge to simple battery with no habitual-criminal penalty enhancer.

We affirm.

This opinion will not be published.

Dist I, Milwaukee County, Brennan, McMahon, JJ., Per Curiam

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Ann T. Bowe, Milwaukee

For Respondent: Robert D. Donohoo, Milwaukee; Edwin J. Hughes, 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