2010AP164-CR State v. Jones

Listen to this article

Criminal Procedure
Ineffective assistance

Christopher Donnell Jones appeals the judgment convicting him of heroin delivery and possession. He also appeals the order denying his postconviction motion.

Jones contends the trial court erred in denying his postconviction claim for an evidentiary hearing and a new trial because his postconviction claim sufficiently alleged that his trial counsel was ineffective.

Specifically, Jones argues that: (1) trial counsel was ineffective for failing to introduce the arrest detention report and supplemental incident report and for failing to cross-examine the authors about the contents of these reports; (2) trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate Jonesís case further and introduce additional evidence; (3) trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to prejudicial hearsay testimony; and (4) the trial court erred by not addressing the cumulative effect of trial counselís deficient conduct. We affirm. Not recommended for publication in the official reports.

2010AP164-CR State v. Jones
Dist I, Milwaukee County, Witkowiak, DiMotto, JJ., Curley, P.J.
Attorneys: For Appellant: Swartz, Melinda A., Milwaukee; For Respondent: Loebel, Karen A., Milwaukee; Neuser, Mark, Madison

Full Text