Postconviction Motion-Lineup Procedure

Listen to this article

WI Court of Appeals – District I

Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Jose M. Dancel

Case No.: 2022AP000476-CR

Officials: White, C.J., Donald, P.J., and Dugan, J.

Focus: Postconviction Motion-Lineup Procedure

The State filed a criminal complaint charging Dancel with attempted first-degree intentional homicide while armed with a dangerous weapon and felony bail jumping. The complaint alleged that on March 22, 2014, Amy was transported to a hospital after suffering twenty-seven gunshot wounds. Amy survived and later told police that she was sitting in her car outside of the salon where she worked when a Hispanic male, whom she later identified as Dancel, approached her and fired gunshots at her.

Dancel appeals the judgment convicting him of the following crimes: (1) attempted first-degree intentional homicide with use of a dangerous weapon; (2) first-degree reckless injury with use of a dangerous weapon; (3) endangering safety by reckless use of a firearm; and (4) felony bail jumping. He also appeals the order denying his postconviction motion.

The sole issue on appeal is whether the lineup procedure in this case was impermissibly suggestive.

During her testimony, Amy made clear that Detective Vrtochnick, who conducted a post-lineup itnterview, had no impact on her identification of Dancel as the person who shot her. Specifically, Amy testified that, when she saw Dancel enter the viewing room, she “knew immediately” that he was the person who shot her. She acknowledged that she did not immediately circle either “yes” or “no” for Dancel because his hair was “slightly shorter” than before. Amy testified, Detective Vrtochnick reminded her of the lineup instructions she had previously been given, and then told Amy to “follow what felt right.” Amy’s testimony reflects that she was positive that Dancel was the shooter before speaking with Detective Vrtochnick.

Affirmed.

Decided 09/12/23

Full Text