Criminal Procedure — double jeopardy

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — double jeopardy

Eric Archie Armstrong appeals the judgment convicting him of attempted second-degree intentional homicide, contrary to Wis. Stat. §§ 940.05(1)(a) and 939.32 (2009-10), and setting restitution at over $250,000. He also appeals the order denying his postconviction motion. Armstrong argues that the restitution award—set approximately four years after he was originally sentenced—violated his double jeopardy protections. We disagree. Armstrong did not have an expectation of finality regarding restitution because he was still serving his prison sentence when the award was set, and in fact had over three-quarters of his sentence left; there were attempts to obtain restitution prior to, during, and after sentencing that Armstrong knew about; to a large extent, Armstrong did not dispute the victim’s damages; and his appeal had not yet concluded. We therefore affirm the judgment and order. Not recommended for publication in the official reports.

2010AP1056-CR State v. Armstrong

Dist II, Racine County, Kreul, J., Curley, P.J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Henak, Ellen, Milwaukee; For Respondent: Chiapete, W. Richard, Racine; Probst, Robert, Madison