Sentencing – modification — new factors

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Sentencing – modification — new factors

James R. Blume appeals from a judgment of conviction for two counts of second-degree sexual assault of a child and an order denying his postconviction motion for sentencing relief. Blume argues that he is entitled to sentence modification either because his deteriorating health constitutes a new factor or because his sentence is unduly harsh. In the alternative, Blume requests a new sentencing hearing on grounds that the trial court erroneously exercised its sentencing discretion or in the interest of justice. We conclude that Blume has failed to demonstrate the existence of a new factor. We further conclude that the trial court properly exercised its discretion at sentencing and that the sentence imposed is not unduly harsh. Because Blume has failed to establish either a new factor or an erroneous exercise of discretion at sentencing, we decline to order a new sentencing hearing in the interest of justice. We affirm the judgment and order. This opinion will not be published.

2011AP2710-CR State v. Blume

Dist II, Waukesha County, Davis, Foster, JJ., Per Curiam

Attorneys: For Appellant: Redding, Joseph E., Milwaukee; For Respondent: Schimel, Brad, Waukesha; Remington, Christine A., Madison