Judicial Vindictiveness-Sentencing

WI Court of Appeals – District III

Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Scotty Joe Sandlin

Case No.: 2025AP000045-CR

Officials: Stark, P.J., Hruz, and Gill, JJ.

Focus: Judicial Vindictiveness-Sentencing

Sandlin was convicted of repeated sexual assault of the same child and possession of child pornography. The circuit court rejected his claims that he was entitled to plea withdrawal and resentencing. Sandlin then successfully obtained resentencing because the original sentencing court relied on an incorrect offense date range. A  different judge then imposed a slightly longer sentence, 37 years of initial confinement instead of 35 years, for the sexual assault conviction. Sandlin then argued that the increased sentence reflected judicial vindictiveness and that his guilty plea to possession of child pornography lacked a factual basis.

The Court of Appeals found that the plea was supported by an adequate factual basis when the entire record was considered, not merely the criminal complaint and preliminary hearing. The record showed that an explicit photograph of a child found on a tablet triggered the investigation, additional child pornography was recovered from electronics in Sandlin’s residence, the presentence investigation documented his admissions to viewing child pornography and sexually abusing the victims, and neither Sandlin nor his counsel disputed those facts. These facts supported an inference that Sandlin constructively possessed the image underlying the charge.

The court also rejected Sandlin’s judicial vindictiveness claim. Because resentencing resulted from inaccurate information supplied by the State, not judicial error, and was conducted by a different judge, the presumption of vindictiveness recognized in North Carolina v. Pearce did not apply. Sandlin conceded he could not prove actual vindictiveness, and the record showed the resentencing court based its decision on the proper sentencing factors rather than retaliation for Sandlin’s successful postconviction challenge.

Affirmed.

Decided 06/30/26

Full Text