Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Listen to this article

WI Court of Appeals – District I

Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Jason D. Henderson

Case No.: 2015AP1740-CR

Officials: BRENNAN, J.

Focus: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Jason D. Henderson appeals from the circuit court’s order denying his postconviction motion to withdraw his plea on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel. Henderson claims that both of his trial counsel were ineffective for failing to properly advise him as to the correct bifurcation initial confinement (“IC”) maximum on each of his two charges. He claims he would not have pled guilty to battery if he had known the correct bifurcation IC maximum and that he is therefore entitled to withdraw his plea on manifest injustice grounds. he State responds that neither of Henderson’s trial counsel were ineffective because it is undisputed that they correctly advised him as to the maximum possible term of imprisonment. See State v. Sutton, 2006 WI App 118, ¶1, 294 Wis. 2d 330, 718 N.W.2d 146. As to incorrectly stating the bifurcation IC maximum, the State argues counsel were not deficient because the law at the time of his plea was unsettled. See State v. Lasanske, 2014 WI App 26, ¶10, 353 Wis. 2d 280, 844 N.W.2d 417. Additionally, the State argues that any mistaken information did not prejudice Henderson because Henderson failed to credibly show that he would not have pled guilty to the State’s offer of reduced charges if he had known the correct bifurcated IC maximum. We agree with the State and affirm.

Full Text

Attorney Derek A. Hawkins is the managing partner at Hawkins Law Offices LLC, where he heads up the firm’s startup law practice. He specializes in business formation, corporate governance, intellectual property protection, private equity and venture capital funding and mergers & acquisitions. Check out the website at www.hawkins-lawoffices.com or contact them at 262-737-8825.