District III
April 22, 2015
To:
Hon. Eric J. Lundell
Circuit Court Judge
St. Croix County Courthouse
1101 Carmichael Road
Hudson, WI 54016
Kristi Severson
Clerk of Circuit Court
St. Croix County Courthouse
1101 Carmichael Road
Hudson, WI 54016
John C. Bachman
John Bachman Law Office
P.O. Box 477
Eau Claire, WI 54702-0477
Eric G. Johnson
District Attorney
1101 Carmichael Road
Hudson, WI 54016
Gregory M. Weber
Assistant Attorney General
P.O. Box 7857
Madison, WI 53707-7857
Tiara Lashon Ligon
1281 Marion Street
St. Paul, MN 55117
You are hereby notified that the Court has entered the following opinion and order:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State of Wisconsin v. Tiara Lashon Ligon (L.C. # 2013CF284) |
|
|
|
|
|
Before Hoover, P.J., Stark and Hruz, JJ.
Counsel for Tiara Ligon filed a no-merit report concluding there is no arguable basis for Ligon to challenge her conviction and sentence for retail theft. We reject the no-merit report for three reasons. First, contrary to a statement in the no-merit report, the record does not show that the circuit court gave the warning required by State v. Hampton, 2004 WI 117, ¶2, 274 Wis. 2d 379, 683 N.W.2d 14, and the court imposed a longer sentence than the parties recommended. Second, the transcript does not indicate that the court gave the deportation warning required by State v. Douangmala, 2002 WI 62, ¶21, 253 Wis. 2d 173, 646 N.W.2d 1, and the record does not establish Ligon’s citizenship status. Third, although the sentencing court did not impose the DNA surcharge, a $250 surcharge is reflected in the judgment of conviction. Under Wis. Stat. § 973.046(1r), for a sentence imposed after January 1, 2014, the surcharge is automatic. However, the effective date of the change in the statute has been challenged in this court as an unconstitutional ex post facto law. Because we cannot conclude that raising any of these three issues would be frivolous, we reject the no-merit report and reopen Ligon’s Wis. Stat. Rule 809.30 postconviction rights.
IT IS ORDERED that the no-merit report is rejected and this appeal is dismissed.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time for filing a postconviction motion is extended to sixty days from the date of this order.
Diane M. Fremgen
Clerk of Court of Appeals