Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Fraud — sufficiency of the evidence

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//September 26, 2013//

Fraud — sufficiency of the evidence

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//September 26, 2013//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Fraud — sufficiency of the evidence

Greg LaPean appeals a judgment of conviction for transferring encumbered property with the intent to defraud, in violation of Wis. Stat. § 943.84(2)(a) (2011-12), and an order denying his motion for postconviction relief. LaPean asks us for any one of three forms of relief: (1) reverse his conviction because the evidence was insufficient to support it; (2) reverse his conviction and grant him a new trial because the real controversy was not tried; or (3) remand his case for a Machner hearing because he alleges that his postconviction motion set forth a sufficient factual basis to demonstrate that his trial counsel was ineffective. We affirm. Not recommended for publication in the official reports.

2012AP2309-CR State v. LaPean

Dist III, Dunn County, Stewart, J., Sherman, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Miller, Steven L., River Falls; For Respondent: Peterson, James M., Menomonie; Whelan, Maura F.J., Madison

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests