Plea Withdrawal (Manifest Injustice)-Statutory Criminal Discovery

Listen to this article

WI Court of Appeals – District I

Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Rebecca L. Pineda

Case No.: 2023AP001883-CR

Officials: White, C.J., Colón, P.J., and Geenen, J.

Focus: Plea Withdrawal (Manifest Injustice)-Statutory Criminal Discovery

Pineda pleaded no contest in 2019 and was sentenced to concurrent prison terms with restitution. After sentencing, she learned of an undisclosed connection between the lead investigating detective and the alleged victim, a restaurant owner who had previously run for alderperson.

The undisclosed information showed that the detective served as a trustee of the Milwaukee Police Association while the association financially supported the victim’s political campaign, appeared with the victim in campaign materials, and later honored the victim’s business with an award during the investigation. This relationship was never disclosed to the defense.

On postconviction review, the circuit court found that although Pineda failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel, the State violated its statutory discovery obligations under WIS. STAT. § 971.23 by failing to disclose material impeachment evidence. The court concluded that the information could have been used to challenge both the credibility of the lead investigator and the integrity of the investigation itself, and that the nondisclosure undermined confidence in the outcome of the case.

Before the Court of Appeals, the State argued that Brady does not require disclosure of impeachment evidence before a plea and that the information was not material. The court agreed that Brady does not apply to plea negotiations, but held that Wisconsin’s discovery statute provides broader protection, concluding that the undisclosed impeachment evidence was material and that its nondisclosure created a manifest injustice. The court vacated Pineda’s convictions and permitted a plea withdrawal.

Affirmed.

Decided 01/27/26

Full Text