Criminal Procedure — successive appeals

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//November 23, 2011//

Listen to this article

Criminal Procedure — successive appeals

Vernon Henrique Walker, pro se, appeals from an order denying his “motion for sentencing modification.” Walker contends that sentencing disparity between him and three accomplices constituted a new factor and that the circuit court originally sentenced him on inaccurate information. The circuit court ruled that there was no new factor because the disparity issue could have been raised previously, so the motion was barred by State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis. 2d 168, 185, 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994). We agree that the motion is procedurally barred and affirm. This opinion will not be published. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.23(1)(b)5.

2010AP3148-CR State v. Walker

Dist I, Milwaukee County, Donegan, J., Per Curiam

Attorneys: For Appellant: Walker, Vernon Henrique, pro se; For Respondent: Loebel, Karen A., Milwaukee; O’Neil, Aaron R., Madison

Full Text

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event