Evidentiary Hearing – Vindictive Prosecution

Listen to this article

WI Court of Appeals – District I

Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Rodney Joseph Lass

Case No.: 2018AP2192-CR

Officials: Brash, P.J., Blanchard and Donald, JJ.

Focus: Evidentiary Hearing – Vindictive Prosecution

Rodney Lass appeals a judgment entered on jury verdicts convicting him of seven felonies and two misdemeanors, all as domestic abuse violations. He also appeals the order denying his motion for postconviction relief. A first trial ended in a mistrial and Lass was convicted at a retrial. At the first trial he faced only misdemeanor charges for alleged conduct in 2012. At the second trial he faced multiple felony charges for alleged conduct in 2012, but also in 2008 and 2009. The same person was the alleged victim at both trials. Lass argues that the circuit court erred in rejecting, without holding an evidentiary hearing, his postconviction motion for a new trial based on his claim of vindictive prosecution. Specifically, Lass contends that he is entitled to a hearing to allow him to prove that the prosecutor brought the additional charges after the mistrial “to retaliate against” Lass for prevailing on the mistrial motion in the first trial, and that this violated his due process protection against vindictive prosecution. Separately, Lass argues that the circuit court: erred in rejecting his request for a hearing on a postconviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel at the second trial; denied him his constitutional right to self-representation by not allowing him to directly participate in sidebar conferences during the second trial; and relied on inaccurate information at sentencing. We reject each of Lass’s arguments and accordingly affirm.

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is trademark corporate counsel for Harley-Davidson. Hawkins oversees the prosecution and maintenance of the Harley-Davidson’s international trademark portfolio in emerging markets.