Criminal Appeals Attorney

You have the right to appeal your conviction or sentence:

Wisconsin law permits a defendant to appeal his or her sentence or conviction. This permissive appellate right extends to a defendant whether he or she entered a guilty plea or a jury found him or her guilty. Sometimes, a defendant seeks to challenge an earlier evidentiary or motion hearing issue that affected the trial or decision to enter a guilty plea. Regardless, many defendants have a strong interest in challenging their conviction. They should hire a successful appeal attorney, like me at Racine Defense.

Racine Defense has experience in a wide range of post-conviction appeals.

Here is a list of the range of appeals I have pursued on behalf of my clients over the last 30 years:

• Interlocutory appeal seeking relief of a trial court decision on the admissibility of evidence;

• Writ of Certiorari, which my clients seek when the Division of Hearings and Appeals has ordered that their supervision should be revoked;

• Post-conviction motions challenging the performance and effectiveness of trial counsel;

• Post-conviction motions seeking the withdrawal of a guilty plea based upon a faulty plea colloquy or information unknown to the client at the time of the plea hearing;

• Post-conviction motions seeking a new sentencing hearing based upon new information or inaccurate information that the sentencing court relied upon;

• Writs of Habeas Corpus, seeking federal relief of a Wisconsin decision denying relief to my clients;

• Petitions for review before the United States Supreme Court — asking for the Court to take up a longstanding legal issue (e.g., Community Caretaker Exception).

Racine Defense has a track record of winning appeals for my clients.

Here are the cases where I have successfully argued for appellate relief on behalf of my clients:

• State v. Dartavian Watson, Racine County Circuit Court Case #15CF1495. I helped challenge the blood draw obtained from the client after a vehicular accident. The trial court ruled that the blood draw was reasonable and authorized under Wisconsin statutes and the Fourth Amendment. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals, in an uncontested decision, reversed the trial court and found that the officers unreasonably took the client's blood. The client was released from custody after the appeal.

• State v. Michael Garcia, Racine County Circuit Court Case #15CF1675. I argued that the sentencing court had erroneously considered claims that the client stole his mother's welfare funds to fuel his drug addiction. After investigating the claim, I filed a post-conviction motion to address the claim and seek re-sentencing. The court agreed that it had considered this fact, agreed that the claim was inaccurate, and agreed to modify the client's sentence.