Wis. Stat. » CHAPTER 782 — HABEAS CORPUS
Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 782.01 (2026)

Habeas corpus, who to have; definitions

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
782.01782.01 Habeas corpus, who to have; definitions.
782.01(1)(1) Every person restrained of personal liberty may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to obtain relief from such restraint subject to ss. 782.02 and 974.06.
782.01(2)(2) Any person confined in any hospital or institution as mentally ill or committed for treatment of alcoholism or drug dependence under s. 51.45 (13) may prosecute such writ, and the question of mental illness or need for treatment shall be determined by the court or judge issuing the same. If such court or judge decides that the person is mentally ill or in need of treatment such decision shall not bar the prosecution of such writ a 2nd time if it is claimed that such person has been restored to reason or is no longer in need of treatment.
782.01(3)(3) In this chapter, unless the context requires otherwise, judge includes the supreme court, the court of appeals and circuit courts and each justice and judge thereof and circuit and supplemental court commissioners; and prisoner includes every person restrained of personal liberty; and imprisoned includes every such restraint, and respondent means the person on whom the writ is to be served.
782.01 HistoryHistory: 1971 c. 57; 1973 c. 198; 1977 c. 187, 449; 1979 c. 32 ss. 59, 92 (11); 1979 c. 176; Stats. 1979 s. 782.01; 2001 a. 61; 2017 a. 34.
782.01 AnnotationHabeas corpus is a proper remedy with which to challenge the personal jurisdiction of a trial court over a criminal defendant and to challenge a ruling on a motion to suppress evidence when constitutional issues are involved. State ex rel. Warrender v. Kenosha County Ct. 67 Wis. 2d 333, 227 N.W.2d 450 (1975).
782.01 AnnotationA prevailing plaintiff in a habeas corpus proceeding may not be awarded costs. State ex rel. Korne v. Wolke, 79 Wis. 2d 22, 255 N.W.2d 446 (1977).
782.01 AnnotationA defendant released after making a deposit was not “restrained” under sub. (1). State ex rel. Kelley v. Posner, 91 Wis. 2d 301, 282 N.W.2d 633 (Ct. App. 1979).
782.01 AnnotationHabeas corpus is available to persons released on personal recognizance bonds. State ex rel. Wohlfahrt v. Bodette, 95 Wis. 2d 130, 289 N.W.2d 366 (Ct. App. 1980).
782.01 AnnotationA court had no jurisdiction under s. 974.06, relating to post-conviction procedure, to hear a challenge of the computation of a prisoner’s good time. Habeas corpus is the proper avenue of relief. State v. Johnson, 101 Wis. 2d 698, 305 N.W.2d 188 (Ct. App. 1981).
782.01 AnnotationThe procedure for a writ of habeas corpus is discussed. State ex rel. LeFebre v. Abrahamson, 103 Wis. 2d 197, 307 N.W.2d 186 (1981).
782.01 AnnotationComity between circuit courts was not a sufficient reason to refuse to issue a writ but, under the facts of the case, the penalty for refusing to issue the writ under s. 782.09 was inappropriate. J.V. v. Barron, 112 Wis. 2d 256, 332 N.W.2d 796 (1983).
782.01 AnnotationHabeas corpus is available to a petitioner to challenge a criminal complaint and to test the sufficiency of evidence for bindover. State ex rel. McCaffrey v. Shanks, 124 Wis. 2d 216, 369 N.W.2d 743 (Ct. App. 1985). See also State ex rel. Cornellier v. Black, 144 Wis. 2d 745, 425 N.W.2d 21 (Ct. App. 1988).
Down
Loading...
Loading...
× Details for
PDF view
Link (Permanent link)
Bookmark this location
 View toggle
 Go to top of document
Search in this chapter
 Search in this section
 Search in this agency
 Search in this chapter group
 Search in this chapter
 Search in this section
 Cross references for section
 Acts affecting this section
 References to this
 1970 Statutes Annotations
 Appellate Court Citations
 Administrative Code Index
Reference lines
 Clear highlighting
782.01 AnnotationA defendant’s prejudicial deprivation of appellate counsel, be it the fault of the attorney or the appellate court, is properly remedied by a petition for habeas corpus in the supreme court. State ex rel. Fuentes v. Court of Appeals, 225 Wis. 2d 446, 593 N.W.2d 48 (1999), 98-1534.
782.01 AnnotationA question of statutory interpretation may be considered on a writ of habeas corpus only if noncompliance with the statute at issue resulted in the restraint of the petitioner’s liberty in violation of the constitution or the court’s jurisdiction. State ex rel. Hager v. Marten, 226 Wis. 2d 687, 594 N.W.2d 791 (1999), 97-3841.
782.01 AnnotationBecause it is an extraordinary writ, habeas corpus relief is available only when the petitioner demonstrates: 1) restraint of his or her liberty, 2) the restraint was imposed contrary to constitutional protections or by a body lacking jurisdiction, and 3) no other adequate remedy available at law. A petition for a writ of habeas corpus will not be granted if the petitioner asserts a claim that could have been raised during a prior appeal if the petitioner offers no valid reason to excuse the failure. State v. Pozo, 2002 WI App 279, 258 Wis. 2d 796, 654 N.W.2d 12, 02-0127.
782.01 AnnotationA claim for ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel must be filed with the circuit court either as a s. 974.06 motion or as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. A defendant arguing ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, conversely, may not seek relief under s. 974.06 and must instead petition the court of appeals for a writ of habeas corpus. State v. Starks, 2013 WI 69, 349 Wis. 2d 274, 833 N.W.2d 146, 10-0425.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1980–2022 · leading case: Ezequiel Lopez-Quintero v. Michael A. Dittmann, 928 N.W.2d 480 (Wis. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ezequiel Lopez-Quintero v. Michael A. Dittmann, 928 N.W.2d 480 (Wis. 2019). · cites it 8× “2d 1 ; Wis. Stat. § 782.01 (1) ("Every person restrained of personal liberty may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to obtain relief from such restraint subject to [Wis.”
State Ex Rel. Marberry v. MacHt, 2000 WI 79 (Wis. 2003). · cites it 4× “art I, § 8(4); Wis. Stat. § 782.01 . Habeas corpus is a civil proceeding which "test[s] the right of a person to his personal liberty.”
State Ex Rel. L'Minggio v. Gamble, 2003 WI 82 (Wis. 2003). · cites it 4× “DOC 303, an inmate shall appeal to the warden under s. DOC 303.76 and file an inmate complaint under s.”
State v. Knight, 484 N.W.2d 540 (Wis. 1992). · cites it 2× “1989-90, states: A petition for a writ of habeas corpus or an action seeking that remedy in behalf of a prisoner who is authorized to apply for relief by motion under this section shall not be entertained if it appears that the applicant has failed to apply for relief, by…”
State v. Pozo, 2002 WI App 279 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “4 Wis. Stat. § 782.01 . 5 WISCONSIN Stat. § 974.”
State Ex Rel. Haas v. McReynolds, 2002 WI 43 (Wis. 2002). · cites it 2× “§ 2241 ; Wis. Stat. § 782.01 . Habeas corpus is essentially an equitable remedy, which is available to a petitioner when there is a pressing need for relief or where the process or judgment by which a petitioner is held is void.”
State Ex Rel. Krieger v. Borgen, 2004 WI App 163 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 8× “In April 2003, Krieger filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus with the circuit court pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 782.01 (2001-02). 1 Krieger alleged, among other things, that his pleas were coerced, his due process rights were violated, and his trial counsel was ineffective.”
State Ex Rel. Woods v. Morgan, 591 N.W.2d 922 (Wis. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “Woods filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the circuit court contending that his detention as a parole violator was an unlawful restraint of his personal liberty interest.”
State Ex Rel. Richards v. Leik, 499 N.W.2d 276 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “Section 782.01(1), Stats., provides that "[e]very person restrained of personal liberty may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to obtain relief from such restraint," subject to secs.”
State Ex Rel. Wohlfahrt v. Bodette, 289 N.W.2d 366 (Wis. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “The court should proceed to a determination of whether Wohlfahrt and Damrow are being illegally restrained in that the complaints are based upon insufficient information or do not charge a crime known to law. Accordingly, the order quashing the writ in each case is vacated, and…”
Teas v. Endicott, 494 F.3d 580 (7th Cir. 2007). “In March 2005 counsel representing Teas filed a petition for habe-as corpus under Wis. Stat. § 782.01 , relying on State ex rel.”
Beese v. Todd, 35 F. App'x 241 (7th Cir. 2002). “See Wis. Stat. § 782.01 . Nor did anyone ever describe the underlying bases for Pearson’s lawsuits; the defendants and the district court assume that they necessarily related to Pearson’s conviction, but perhaps the actions challenged something other than the fact or duration of…”
Show all 19 citing cases →
— Wis. Stat. § 782.01(1) — 5 cases
State v. Knight, 484 N.W.2d 540 (Wis. 1992). “1989-90, states: A petition for a writ of habeas corpus or an action seeking that remedy in behalf of a prisoner who is authorized to apply for relief by motion under this section shall not be entertained if it appears that the applicant has failed to apply for relief, by…”
State Ex Rel. Woods v. Morgan, 591 N.W.2d 922 (Wis. Ct. App. 1999). “Woods filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the circuit court contending that his detention as a parole violator was an unlawful restraint of his personal liberty interest.”
State Ex Rel. Richards v. Leik, 499 N.W.2d 276 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “Section 782.01(1), Stats., provides that "[e]very person restrained of personal liberty may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to obtain relief from such restraint," subject to secs.”
State Ex Rel. Helmer v. Cullen, 440 N.W.2d 790 (Wis. Ct. App. 1989).
State Ex Rel. Krieger v. Borgen, 2004 WI App 163 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). “In April 2003, Krieger filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus with the circuit court pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 782.01 (2001-02). 1 Krieger alleged, among other things, that his pleas were coerced, his due process rights were violated, and his trial counsel was ineffective.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.