Legal Opinion

State v. Thexton

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided December 6, 2006No. 2005AP3109-CR, 2005AP3110-CRPublished

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

¶ 1. In State v. Suchocki, 208 Wis. 2d 509, 561 N.W.2d 332 (Ct. App. 1997), the defendant challenged his sentence on the basis that the author of his presentence investigation report was married to the district attorney who had prosecuted him. We held in that case that such a relationship demonstrated bias in the PSI as a matter of law. In this case, Donald W Thexton asks us to extend Suehoeki to cover his situation, in which the probation agent who prepared his PSI was married to another probation agent, and the two agents together were responsible for his supervision. We decline to do so.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. State v. GallionWisconsin Supreme Court · 2004
  3. State v. TiepelmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 2006
  4. State v. DanielsCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1983
  5. State v. KnappCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1983

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API