By: Derek Hawkins//October 13, 2020//
WI Court of Appeals – District III
Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Murry Locke
Case No.: 2018AP2446-CR
Officials: Stark, P.J., Hruz and Seidl, JJ.
Focus: Sentencing Modification
Murry Locke, pro se, appeals from an order denying his motion for sentence modification based on two allegedly new factors. The first alleged new factor was that one of Locke’s read-in offenses involved the violation of a statute that was later found to be unconstitutional. Locke asserts the court improperly considered that offense at his resentencing. The second alleged new factor was Locke’s unawareness, during his resentencing, of the circumstances under which a resentencing court can lawfully impose a sentence longer than that levied at the original sentencing. Locke argues that by imposing a longer sentence upon his resentencing here, the court violated his rights to due process and to be free from double jeopardy. For the reasons stated herein, we conclude that Locke has not shown a new factor that warrants modification of his sentence. Accordingly, we affirm.