Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Sentencing — DNA surcharge

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//November 16, 2011//

Sentencing — DNA surcharge

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//November 16, 2011//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Sentencing — DNA surcharge

A circuit court need not explicitly find that a defendant has the ability to pay the DNA surcharge before imposing it.

“On the basis of our review of the record in this case, we are satisfied that the circuit court properly exercised its discretion in sentencing Ziller. The circuit court considered the three primary sentencing factors and noted them on the record. See State v. Gallion, 2004 WI 42, ¶44, 270 Wis. 2d 535, 678 N.W.2d 197. The court adhered to the Cherry standards. It noted that Ziller had previously been employed, which indicates that he had the ability to compensate his victims. Furthermore, Ziller stated, ‘I take full responsibility for what happened…. I want to make things right with the victims as soon as I can.’ The court ordered that Ziller pay roughly $10,000 in restitution to fully compensate his victims. As the court determined that Ziller was employable such that he could pay $10,000 in restitution, and as Ziller stated that he wanted “to make things right with the victims,” the court was well within its discretion to order Ziller to pay the $250 surcharge rather than force the cost upon the public.”

“If Ziller is asking this court to adopt a rule whereby a circuit court must explicitly describe its reasons for imposing a DNA surcharge, we decline to adopt such a rule. The circuit court is in the best position to examine the relevant sentencing factors in each case. State v. Spears, 227 Wis. 2d 495, 506, 596 N.W.2d 375 (1999). The burden is therefore on the defendant to show that the sentence is unreasonable, and Ziller has failed to point to any aspect of his sentence that is unreasonable. State v. Lechner, 217 Wis. 2d 392, 418, 576 N.W.2d 912 (1998).”

Affirmed.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

2011AP416-CR State v. Ziller

Dist. II, Ozaukee County, Wolfgram, J., Reilly, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Holzman, Michael S., Waukesha; For Respondent: O’Brien, Daniel J., Madison; Gerol, Adam Y., Port Washington

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests