Weekend Appointments Available
Returning Calls 7 Days A Week
Get The Help You Need
Call Us Today!
Weekend Appointments Available
Returning Calls 7 Days A Week
Location: 17 S. Barstow St. Eau Claire, WI 54702
Get The Help You Need
Call Us Today!
When making decisions regarding a defendant’s sentencing in a criminal matter, is it a violation of due process for a court to consider information that is unknown to the parties?
That is the question raised in the case of Wisconsin v. Counihan.
Carrie E. Counihan pleaded no contest to five misdemeanor counts of theft in a business setting. The parties jointly recommended that the sentence be withheld and ordered probation for up to three years and restitution.
At sentencing, the circuit court discussed the basis for its sentencing decision and the information it had consulted, which included review of sentences and files in similar, comparable cases. This was the first time the parties were informed that the court consulted other case files in determining sentencing.
The parties’ joint sentencing recommendation was rejected and instead the judge imposed two concurrent nine-month jail sentences in addition to restitution, fines, and court costs.
Counihan filed a motion for postconviction relief, arguing the circuit court violated her right to due process at sentencing in not providing her with notice that it would consider previously unknown information. Counihan further argued that her counsel was ineffective because they did not object to the consideration of this information in sentencing.
The State argued that, because Counihan did not object to the consideration of this information at sentencing, she had forfeited her direct challenge. Upon review, the Wisconsin Supreme Court found that, in situations where previously unknown information is introduced by the circuit court during sentencing, a defendant does not forfeit a direct challenge to consideration of the information by failing to object at the time of sentencing. The Court found that Counihan properly raised the alleged error in a postconviction motion.
The Court concluded Counihan’s due process rights were not violated and there was no issue of ineffective assistance by counsel at sentencing. The Wisconsin Supreme Court modified the decision of the Court of Appeals and affirmed it as modified.
If you or a loved one has been charged with a criminal offense, speak with an
experienced criminal defense attorney immediately.
At Cohen Law Office, we offer free initial consultations to discuss your case further and find the right solution for you. Our team provides the best representation to each client we work with and present the strongest possible defense. Give us a call today to start your resolution in your criminal defense case.
Weekend Appointments Available
Returning Calls 7 Days A Week