Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Sentencing — accurate information

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//February 14, 2012//

Sentencing — accurate information

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//February 14, 2012//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Sentencing — accurate information

London Teiaires Dabney, pro se, appeals from an order denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea or modify his sentence. On appeal he argues that he is entitled to resentencing because the sentencing court failed to explain why Dabney received the same sentence as his brother despite differences in their criminal records and Dabney’s willingness to testify at his brother’s trial. He also argues that because the presentence investigation report (PSI) incorporated a while armed weapon enhancer that was dismissed, he was sentenced on the basis of an inflated recommendation and inaccurate information. We affirm the circuit court’s determination that Dabney did not present any new factors supporting sentence modification. This opinion will not be published.

2011AP570 State v. Dabney

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

Attorneys: For Appellant: Dabney, London Teiaires, pro se; For Respondent: Kassel, Jeffrey J., Madison; Loebel, Karen A., Milwaukee

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests