Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Sentencing Guidelines – Probation

By: Derek Hawkins//November 11, 2020//

Sentencing Guidelines – Probation

By: Derek Hawkins//November 11, 2020//

Listen to this article

WI Court of Appeals – District IV

Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Peter J. King, Jr.,

Case No.: 2019AP1642-CR

Officials: Fitzpatrick, P.J., Blanchard, and Nashold, JJ.

Focus: Sentencing Guidelines – Probation

Peter J. King, Jr., was convicted in the Sauk County Circuit Court of using a computer to facilitate a child sex crime and child enticement. The circuit court imposed a bifurcated imprisonment sentence on the count of using a computer to facilitate a child sex crime. The circuit court also imposed conditions of extended supervision which restricted King’s access to the internet, and King’s extended supervision was twice revoked for violating those conditions.

On the child enticement count, King received a probation disposition of ten years, which began after completion of King’s sentence for the use of a computer to facilitate a child sex crime. King’s conditions of probation imposed by the circuit court included restrictions on his access to the internet. King’s probation was revoked for, among other reasons, violating those court-ordered conditions that restricted his access to the internet. After revocation, the circuit court imposed a bifurcated imprisonment sentence for the child enticement count. When King is released to extended supervision, he will be subject to court-ordered conditions of extended supervision that restrict his access to the internet. Those court-ordered extended supervision conditions are a subject of this appeal.

King contends, based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Packingham v. North Carolina, 137 S. Ct. 1730 (2017), that the court-ordered extended supervision conditions restricting his access to the internet are overly broad and, as a result, his First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and freedom of association are improperly infringed. King also argues that the circuit court erred in denying his motion for resentencing and a reduction in his imprisonment sentence on the child enticement conviction because the Court’s opinion in Packingham is a “new factor” that was overlooked at sentencing.

We conclude that the extended supervision conditions imposed by the circuit court that will restrict King’s access to the internet are not overly broad and do not improperly infringe King’s First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and freedom of association. We also conclude that the Court’s opinion in Packingham is not a new factor requiring resentencing on the child enticement count. Accordingly, we affirm the rulings of the circuit court.

Recommended for Publication

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.

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