|
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND RELEASED January 11, 1996 |
NOTICE |
|
A party may file with the
Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of
Appeals. See § 808.10 and
Rule 809.62(1), Stats. |
This opinion is subject to
further editing. If published, the
official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports. |
No. 95-2216-CR-NM
STATE
OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF
APPEALS
DISTRICT IV
STATE OF WISCONSIN,
Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
CARLTON B. CAMPBELL,
Defendant-Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment
of the circuit court for Dane County:
PATRICK J. FIEDLER, Judge. Affirmed.
GARTZKE,
P.J. Appointed counsel for Carlton B. Campbell, Attorney
Morris D. Berman, has filed a no merit report pursuant to Rule 809.32, Stats. Counsel
provided Campbell with a copy of the report.
Campbell responded to the report.
Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we conclude there is no arguable merit
to any issue that could be raised on appeal.[1]
Campbell pleaded no
contest to one count of bail jumping, a Class A misdemeanor, with an
enhancement for habitual criminality.
Sections 946.49(1)(a) and 939.62(1)(a), Stats. The court
sentenced Campbell to eighteen months in prison, consecutive to the sentence he
was then serving.
Campbell's response to
the no merit report can be read as asserting that he did not understand the
plea proceedings and was not given adequate time to review the plea
questionnaire. We ordered Campbell's
attorney to discuss the issue with him and determine whether Campbell would
wish to withdraw his plea. Attorney Berman
informs us that Campbell does not wish to move to withdraw his plea. Therefore, we need not review issues related
to that plea any further.
Counsel's no merit
report does not address whether the trial court erroneously exercised its
discretion in sentencing Campbell. When
imposing sentence, a trial court must consider the gravity of the offense, the
offender's character, and the public's need for protection. State v. Thompson, 172 Wis.2d
257, 264, 493 N.W.2d 729, 732 (Ct. App. 1992).
We will not disturb a sentence imposed by the trial court unless the
court erroneously exercised its discretion. Id. The sentencing transcript shows that the
court considered the relevant factors.
The court sentenced Campbell to one-half of the possible maximum term. We conclude there would be no arguable merit
to this issue.
Our review of the record
discloses no other potential issues for appeal. Attorney Berman is relieved of further representing Campbell in
this matter.
By the Court.--Judgment
affirmed.