Sentencing — mandatory minimums

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Sentencing — mandatory minimums

Where the circuit and both parties erroneously believed that a mandatory minimum was applicable, the defendant must be resentenced.

“The circuit court acknowledged that the error ‘really pervaded the entire file in this case.’ The error was not an isolated mistake that affected just a discretionary decision of the circuit court. The error infected the charging of Travis; the error infected the plea negotiations; the error infected Travis’s discussions with his trial counsel; the error infected the plea hearing; and the error infected the sentencing of Travis, where all participants acted with the misunderstanding that the starting point for Travis was five years in prison. We agree with the circuit court that the error affected the entire framework within which Travis was prosecuted.”

“We hold that the error affected the fairness, integrity, and the public reputation of the judicial proceedings. All participants operated under the assumption that Travis was going to prison for at least five years, when in reality there was no mandatory minimum sentence required. It is impossible to measure the breadth of the error. The error affected the State’s charging decision, Travis’s plea decision, communications and negotiations between the State and Travis, and the circuit court’s basic assumptions as to Travis’s sentence. Travis’s due process right to be sentenced upon accurate information was violated. As the pervasive error seriously affected the fairness and integrity of Travis’s sentence, we hold that it was a structural error requiring a reversal of the circuit court’s denial of resentencing.”

Reversed and Remanded.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

2011AP685-CR State v. Travis

Dist. II, Kenosha County, Warren, J., Reilly, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Hagopian, Suzanne L., Madison; For Respondent: Wren, Christopher G., Madison; Zapf, Robert D., Kenosha