postconviction evidentiary hearing in Wisconsin

2022However, “[a] court need not address both components of this inquiry if the defendant does not make a sufficient showing on one.” State v. Smith, 2003 WI App 234, ¶15 , 268 Wis. 2d 138 , 671 N.W.2d 854 . ¶29 A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel requires that a postconviction evidentiary hearing be held “to preserve the testimony of trial counsel.” State v. Machner, 92 Wis. 2d 797, 804 , 285 N.W.2d 905 (Ct. App. 1979).

2022However, “[a] court need not address both components of this inquiry if the defendant does not make a sufficient showing on one.” State v. Smith, 2003 WI App 234, ¶15 , 268 Wis. 2d 138 , 671 N.W.2d 854 . ¶29 A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel requires that a postconviction evidentiary hearing be held “to preserve the testimony of trial counsel.” State v. Machner, 92 Wis. 2d 797, 804 , 285 N.W.2d 905 (Ct. App. 1979).

2025Id. at 310 . ¶15 Sypher’s ineffective assistance claims are scattered about his brief, but we address the two that we are able to identify. ¶16 First, Sypher asserts that the circuit court should have held a postconviction evidentiary hearing regarding an alleged hematoma suffered by the dog, which his trial counsel did not explore at trial.

2020A claim of ineffective assistance requires that a postconviction evidentiary hearing be held “to preserve the testimony of trial counsel,” State v. Machner, 92 Wis. 2d 797, 804 , 285 N.W.2d 905 (Ct. App. 1979), but a defendant is not automatically entitled to a Machner hearing, State v. Bentley, 201 Wis. 2d 303, 309-10 , 548 N.W.2d 50 (1996). ¶51 Rather, the postconviction court is required to hold an evidentiary hearing only if the defendant has alleged “sufficient material facts that, if true, would entitle the defendant to relief.” Allen, 274 Wis. 2d 568, ¶9 .

2023Under Bangert, a post-disposition motion “must make a prima facie showing that the circuit court violated its mandatory duties and must allege the parent did not know or understand the information that should have been provided at the hearing.” Therese S., 314 Wis. 2d 493, ¶6 ; State v. Brown, 2006 WI 100, ¶39 , 293 Wis. 2d 594 , 716 N.W.2d 906 . ¶12 If a motion establishes a prima facie violation of a court mandated duty and makes the requisite allegations, “the court must hold a postconviction evidentiary hearing[.]” Brown, 293 Wis. 2d 594, ¶40 .

2022Under Bangert, a post-disposition motion “must make a prima facie showing that the [trial] court violated its mandatory duties and must allege the parent did not know or understand the information that should have been provided at the hearing.” Therese S., 314 Wis. 2d 493, ¶6 ; State v. Brown, 2006 WI 100, ¶39 , 293 Wis. 2d 594 , 716 N.W.2d 906 . ¶10 If a motion establishes a prima facie violation of a court mandated duty and makes the requisite allegations, “the court must hold a postconviction evidentiary hearing[.]” Brown, 293 Wis. 2d 594, ¶40 .

2020STAT. § 974.06 motion, “the burden shifts to the defendant who must show the need for a postconviction evidentiary hearing with a clearly articulated justification.” McAlister, 380 Wis. 2d 684, ¶28 (citing State v. Balliette, 2011 WI 79, ¶58 , 336 Wis. 2d 358 , 805 N.W.2d 334 ). ¶24 Both claims for relief here are based on purported newly discovered evidence.

2020STAT. § 974.06 motion, “the burden shifts to the defendant who must show the need for a postconviction evidentiary hearing with a clearly articulated justification.” McAlister, 380 Wis. 2d 684, ¶28 (citing State v. Balliette, 2011 WI 79, ¶58 , 336 Wis. 2d 358 , 805 N.W.2d 334 ). ¶24 Both claims for relief here are based on purported newly discovered evidence.

2026The accountant testified at the postconviction evidentiary hearing that there was no documentary evidence that Pineda stole cash, took funds, or used credit cards without authorization. 13 witnesses whose credibility would have been determinative of [Pineda’s] guilt.” See Harris, 272 Wis. 2d 80, ¶30 .

2026Frost’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim was dismissed as being procedurally barred pursuant to State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis. 2d 168, 185 , 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994) (claims of error that could have been raised on direct appeal or in previous WIS.

2026Frost’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim was dismissed as being procedurally barred pursuant to State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis. 2d 168, 185 , 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994) (claims of error that could have been raised on direct appeal or in previous WIS.

2024State v. Maday, 2017 WI 28, ¶25 , 374 Wis. 2d 164 , 892 N.W.2d 611 . “‘[T]he circumstances of the case and ... counsel’s conduct and strategy’ are considered findings of fact.” Id. (citation omitted). 12 ¶29 After noting that it had reviewed the transcripts and arguments from the postconviction evidentiary hearing, the circuit court made the following findings: [T]here was some disputed testimony at that hearing.

2024State v. Maday, 2017 WI 28, ¶25 , 374 Wis. 2d 164 , 892 N.W.2d 611 . “‘[T]he circumstances of the case and ... counsel’s conduct and strategy’ are considered findings of fact.” Id. (citation omitted). 12 ¶29 After noting that it had reviewed the transcripts and arguments from the postconviction evidentiary hearing, the circuit court made the following findings: [T]here was some disputed testimony at that hearing.

2023“If the defendant is able to prove all four of these criteria, then it must be determined whether a reasonable probability exists that had the jury heard the newly[]discovered evidence, it would have had a reasonable doubt as to the 5 defendant’s guilt.” State v. Plude, 2008 WI 58, ¶32 , 310 Wis. 2d 28 , 750 N.W.2d 42 . ¶10 Love makes three claims of newly discovered evidence: (1) a report from a medical pathologist that re-examined the autopsy data; (2) the recovery of the firearm that killed Johnson; and (3) unheard witness statements that collectively raised a third-party perpetrator defens

2023“If the defendant is able to prove all four of these criteria, then it must be determined whether a reasonable probability exists that had the jury heard the newly[]discovered evidence, it would have had a reasonable doubt as to the 5 defendant’s guilt.” State v. Plude, 2008 WI 58, ¶32 , 310 Wis. 2d 28 , 750 N.W.2d 42 . ¶10 Love makes three claims of newly discovered evidence: (1) a report from a medical pathologist that re-examined the autopsy data; (2) the recovery of the firearm that killed Johnson; and (3) unheard witness statements that collectively raised a third-party perpetrator defens

2021“Findings of fact include ‘the circumstances of the case and the counsel’s conduct and strategy.’” Id. (quoted source omitted).

2021We will accept the circuit court’s factual findings following the postconviction evidentiary hearing “unless they are clearly erroneous.” Id.

2021State v. Taylor, 2013 WI 34, ¶49 , 347 Wis. 2d 30 , 829 N.W.2d 482 . ¶12 A claim of ineffective representation requires that a postconviction evidentiary hearing be held “to preserve the testimony of trial counsel.” State v. Machner, 92 Wis. 2d 797, 804 , 285 N.W.2d 905 (Ct. App. 1979).

2021State v. Taylor, 2013 WI 34, ¶49 , 347 Wis. 2d 30 , 829 N.W.2d 482 . ¶12 A claim of ineffective representation requires that a postconviction evidentiary hearing be held “to preserve the testimony of trial counsel.” State v. Machner, 92 Wis. 2d 797, 804 , 285 N.W.2d 905 (Ct. App. 1979).

2020To prove prejudice in the plea withdrawal context, a defendant must show that, absent counsel’s alleged errors, he or she “would have insisted on going to trial.” State v. Burton, 2013 WI 61, ¶50 , 349 Wis. 2d 1 , 832 N.W.2d 611 . ¶37 At the postconviction evidentiary hearing, Hollenquest testified he had the opposite goal in mind during plea negotiations: “All I know is, I didn't want to take the victims in this case through a trial court or anything else.

2020To prove prejudice in the plea withdrawal context, a defendant must show that, absent counsel’s alleged errors, he or she “would have insisted on going to trial.” State v. Burton, 2013 WI 61, ¶50 , 349 Wis. 2d 1 , 832 N.W.2d 611 . ¶37 At the postconviction evidentiary hearing, Hollenquest testified he had the opposite goal in mind during plea negotiations: “All I know is, I didn't want to take the victims in this case through a trial court or anything else.

2019We review de novo “‘the legal questions of whether deficient performance has been established and whether it led to prejudice rising to a level undermining the reliability of the proceeding.’” State v. Roberson, 2006 WI 80, ¶24 , 292 Wis. 2d 280 , 717 N.W.2d 111 (citation omitted). ¶19 A claim of ineffective representation requires that a postconviction evidentiary hearing be held “to preserve the testimony of trial counsel.” State v. Machner, 92 Wis. 2d 797, 804 , 285 N.W.2d 905 (Ct. App. 1979).

2019We review de novo “‘the legal questions of whether deficient performance has been established and whether it led to prejudice rising to a level undermining the reliability of the proceeding.’” State v. Roberson, 2006 WI 80, ¶24 , 292 Wis. 2d 280 , 717 N.W.2d 111 (citation omitted). ¶19 A claim of ineffective representation requires that a postconviction evidentiary hearing be held “to preserve the testimony of trial counsel.” State v. Machner, 92 Wis. 2d 797, 804 , 285 N.W.2d 905 (Ct. App. 1979).

2019“The reason for this rule is that the trier of fact had the opportunity to observe the witnesses and their demeanor.” Id. ¶4 Five witnesses testified at the postconviction evidentiary hearing, which was held three and one-half years after sentencing.

2019The insurmountable problem for Shannon is that following the evidentiary hearing on his postconviction motion, the circuit court found just the opposite of what Shannon claims on appeal; it found that counsel “never advised [Shannon] to withdraw his NGI plea.” (Emphasis added.) As stated, on appeal we uphold factual findings that are not clearly erroneous, Kimbrough, 246 Wis. 2d 648, ¶27 , and this finding is not clearly erroneous as it is supported by counsel’s testimony at the postconviction evidentiary hearing. ¶12 At that hearing, Shannon’s counsel testified that when the first court-appoi

2018Subsequent cases have made clear that if the defendant's motion "establishes a prima facie violation of Wis. Stat. § 971.08 or other court-mandated duties and makes the requisite allegations, the court must hold a postconviction evidentiary hearing . . . ." Brown, 293 Wis. 2d 594, ¶40 (emphasis added). ¶56 In State v. Hampton, 2004 WI 107, ¶72 , 274 Wis. 2d 379 , 683 N.W.2d 14 , the court explained the defendant's right to an evidentiary hearing when the circuit court errs at the plea hearing and the defendant alleges that he or she did not understand the information that should have been prov

2018Subsequent cases have made clear that if the defendant's motion "establishes a prima facie violation of Wis. Stat. § 971.08 or other court-mandated duties and makes the requisite allegations, the court must hold a postconviction evidentiary hearing . . . ." Brown, 293 Wis. 2d 594, ¶40 (emphasis added). ¶56 In State v. Hampton, 2004 WI 107, ¶72 , 274 Wis. 2d 379 , 683 N.W.2d 14 , the court explained the defendant's right to an evidentiary hearing when the circuit court errs at the plea hearing and the defendant alleges that he or she did not understand the information that should have been prov

2016If, at the hearing, the State fails to meet its burden, "the defendant is entitled to withdraw his plea as a matter of right." Cross, 326 Wis. 2d 492, ¶20 .

2013Relying on State v. Bentley, 201 Wis. 2d 303 , 548 N.W.2d 50 (1996), and Nelson v. State, 54 Wis. 2d 489 , 195 N.W.2d 629 (1972), the Allen court repeated the well-established rule: First, [courts] determine whether the motion on its face alleges sufficient material facts that, if true, would entitle the defendant to relief.

2013Relying on State v. Bentley, 201 Wis. 2d 303 , 548 N.W.2d 50 (1996), and Nelson v. State, 54 Wis. 2d 489 , 195 N.W.2d 629 (1972), the Allen court repeated the well-established rule: First, [courts] determine whether the motion on its face alleges sufficient material facts that, if true, would entitle the defendant to relief.