Criminal Procedure – complaint — vagueness

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Criminal Procedure – complaint — vagueness

Darryl J. Badzinski appeals from a judgment entered on a jury’s verdict convicting him of first-degree sexual assault of a child, see Wis. Stat. § 948.02(1) (1994-95), and the circuit court’s order denying his motion for postconviction relief. We conclude that the complaint was not unconstitutionally vague. Judge Fine’s opinion, joined in by Judge Curley, concludes that the trial court erred in answering a question posed by the jury. Judge Fine’s opinion is the decision of the court on that issue. See State v. Dowe, 120 Wis. 2d 192, 194, 352 N.W.2d 660 (1984) (opinion upon which a majority of the court agrees is the court’s opinion). Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for a new trial. Not recommended for publication in the official reports.

2011AP2905-CR State v. Badzinski

Dist I, Milwaukee County, Cimpl, J., Brennan, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Loeb, Basil M., Wauwatosa; For Respondent: Kassel, Jeffrey J., Madison; Loebel, Karen A., Milwaukee