Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance

Following a jury trial, Michael A. Clements was convicted of child sexual assault, in violation of Wis. Stat. § 948.02(2) (2009-10). He appeals the judgment of conviction and the order denying his motion for postconviction relief on two grounds: that his trial attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel and that the real controversy was not fully tried.

In making the ineffective assistance argument, Clements contends that his attorney: (1) failed to challenge the credibility of the alleged victim to the degree that he could have, such as by seeking to impeach her based on a prior recorded statement and by objecting on hearsay grounds to testimony of a school counselor who testified that the victim disclosed the assault to her; (2) failed to object to the State’s characterization, during argument to the jury, of the testimony of the only witness called by the defense at trial, the alleged victim’s grandmother; (3) unnecessarily opened the door to unfairly prejudicial testimony of the alleged victim during her cross-examination; and (4) failed to present the jury with a consistent theory of defense. Clements’ arguments in support of his contention that the real controversy was not fully tried depend entirely on the same arguments made in support of the challenge to his conviction based on ineffective assistance.

For the following reasons we conclude that Clements failed to establish ineffective assistance before the trial court, and also failed to establish that the real controversy was not fully tried. Accordingly, we affirm. Not recommended for publication in the official reports.

2010AP1978-CR State v. Clements

Dist IV, La Crosse County, Bjerke, J., Blanchard, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Grunder, Steven D., Madison; For Respondent: Kassel, Jeffrey J., Madison; Gruenke, Tim, La Crosse