Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//February 28, 2012//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance

Miller X. Lark-Holland appeals the order denying his motion for postconviction relief seeking resentencing. He claims that his trial lawyer gave him constitutionally deficient representation because she: (1) did not emphasize that another man threatened Lark-Holland into robbing the pharmacy, and made other statements that he contends undercut his character; (2) lost the letter Lark-Holland prepared for sentencing; and (3) did not file a request for substitution against the assigned sentencing judge, the Honorable Daniel L. Konkol. See Wis. Stat. § 971.20 (substitution of judge). We affirm. Publication in the official reports is not recommended.

2011AP791-CR State v. Lark-Holland

Dist I, Milwaukee County, DiMotto, J., Fine, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Lichstein, Byron C., Madison; For Respondent: Loebel, Karen A., Milwaukee; Sanders, Michael C., Madison

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event