State v. Watson

¶ 1. Razzie Watson appeals from a judgment convicting him of substantial battery as a repeater, and from an order denying his postconviction motion. Watson argues that his sentence enhancement as a repeater should be vacated because: (1) he never admitted nor did the State prove that he had been previously convicted of a felony, or, alternatively (2) he was not a repeater because he had not been previously "convicted" of a crime within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 939.62(2) (1997-98) 1 when he committed the substantial battery. We conclude that Watson admitted a prior felony conviction and…