Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//October 22, 2013//

Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//October 22, 2013//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — ineffective assistance

Marty Franzke appeals an order denying his pro se Wis. Stat. § 974.06 (2011-12), motion for a new trial. Franzke had a previous postconviction motion and appeal, and attempts to avoid the prohibition against successive postconviction motions by alleging ineffective assistance of his initial postconviction counsel, Edward J. Hunt. He contends Hunt was ineffective for failing to make two arguments: (1) the trial court violated Franzke’s Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights when it sent exhibits (human services reports) to the jury room at the jury’s request without Franzke or his attorney being present; and (2) Franzke’s trial counsel, Joseph Norby, was ineffective for failing to request a mistrial after he learned the jury received these exhibits and because Norby referred to the exhibits as part of an intervention by the agency. He also contends the court improperly exercised its discretion by not allowing him to subpoena Norby, the author of one of the human services reports, and a juror for the present postconviction motion hearing. We reject these arguments and affirm the order. This opinion will not be published.

2012AP2276 State v. Franzke

Dist III, Outagamie County, McGinnis, J., Per Curiam

Attorneys: For Appellant: Franzke, Marty J., pro se; For Respondent: Schneider, Carrie A., Appleton; Burgundy, Sarah, 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