2009AP1227 State v. Freeman

Listen to this article

Criminal Procedure
Newly discovered evidence; ineffective assistance

Mary Freeman appeals an order denying her Wis. Stat. § 974.06 (2007-08) postconviction motion. The circuit court denied the motion without a hearing, concluding that the motion was procedurally barred because the issues were addressed or could have been raised in a previous postconviction motion and no-merit appeal. The court concluded that Freeman failed to establish sufficient reason for not raising the issues in the earlier proceedings. Freeman argues that newly discovered evidence and ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel constitute sufficient reasons for allowing further postconviction proceedings. Because we conclude that Freeman’s motion established neither newly discovered evidence nor ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel, we affirm the order denying the postconviction motion. This opinion will not be published.

2009AP1227 State v. Freeman

Dist IV, Dane County, Nicks, J., Per Curiam

Attorneys: For Appellant: Freeman, Mary E., pro se; For Respondent: Genda, Christine M., Madison; Murphy, Anne Christenson, Madison

Full Text