Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance — no-merit reports

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance — no-merit reports

Jeremy Blank appeals from an order denying his Wis. Stat. § 974.06 (2009-10) postconviction motion alleging that his postconviction counsel was ineffective for not raising claims that his trial counsel was ineffective. The trial court concluded that Blank’s motion was barred by State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis. 2d 168, 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994), because this court had previously denied Blank’s Knight petition.[2] We affirm the trial court’s order albeit for a slightly different reason. See State v. Sharp, 180 Wis. 2d 640, 650, 511 N.W.2d 316 (Ct. App. 1993) (we may sustain the trial court’s determination on different grounds). We conclude that Blank did not demonstrate a sufficient reason for failing to raise his ineffective assistance of trial counsel claims in response to the no-merit report filed in his appeal from his conviction. This opinion will not be published.

2011AP1077 State v. Blank

Dist III, Winnebago County, Woldt, J., Per Curiam

Attorneys: For Appellant: Blank, Jeremy M., pro se; For Respondent: Wren, Christopher G., Madison; Gossett, Christian A., Oshkosh