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!
Court decisions can sometimes leave an indelible mark on the interpretation of the law, and State v. Counihan stands as a significant milestone within Wisconsin's state Supreme Court. This pivotal case highlights due process and the utilization of extraneous information in sentencing determinations.
New paragraph
The Wisconsin State Supreme Court grappled with two fundamental issues. Firstly, whether Counihan's failure to object during the sentencing hearing forfeited her due process claim. Secondly, if the use of extraneous information, undisclosed until the hearing, violated her due process rights.
The court ruled that Counihan's lack of objection during the hearing didn't lead to forfeiture of her rights, especially when the information was revealed at the sentencing stage. Filing a postconviction motion was deemed a timely approach to raise concerns about the information's use.
However, the court ultimately rejected Counihan's due process claim on its merits. It emphasized that the court's broad inquiry and consultation of external cases during sentencing did not infringe upon due process rights.

Courts are encouraged to consider various sources of information, and the practice of reviewing sentences in similar cases aligns with the goal of consistent sentencing. The court asserted that this practice aids judges, especially those new to the bench, in understanding the broader context of sentencing. It highlighted that the use of extraneous information, even without advance notice, didn't violate due process. The judge's rationale for the sentence was transparent, and the sentencing hearing ensured that Counihan's sentence was individualized and fair.
State v. Counihan serves as a cornerstone in Wisconsin's legal landscape, addressing the intricate balance between due process rights and the use of extraneous information in sentencing. The case underscores the importance of transparency in sentencing decisions, allowing judges to draw from various sources for context.

While the ruling rejected the due process claim, it highlighted the permissibility of consulting comparable cases during sentencing. State v. Counihan is a reminder of the evolving interplay between legal principles and practical considerations in pursuing justice within Wisconsin's state Supreme Court.
There are countless criminal defense attorneys in Eau Claire, but your job is to hire the one that is right for you. The best way to determine that is through a complimentary consultation with our attorneys. If you are charged with a crime, contact an experienced criminal defense attorney at the Cohen Law Offices at 715-514-5051 today.
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