Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance — double jeopardy

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//October 10, 2012//

Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance — double jeopardy

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//October 10, 2012//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance — double jeopardy

John Bullock appeals a judgment convicting him of two counts of first-degree sexual assault, as a party to a crime, and an order denying postconviction relief. Bullock argues: (1) his trial attorney was ineffective; (2) his convictions violate double jeopardy; (3) he was denied his right to an impartial jury; (4) the circuit court improperly admitted certain evidence; (5) insufficient evidence supports his convictions; (6) the real controversy was not fully tried; and (7) he is entitled to resentencing. We reject Bullock’s arguments and affirm. This opinion will not be published.

2012AP107-CR State v. Bullock

Dist III, Eau Claire County, Lenz, J., Per Curiam

Attorneys: For Appellant: Harless, Sarah Mae, Eau Claire; For Respondent: Balistreri, Thomas J., Madison; Wright, Brian H., Eau Claire

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests