Truesdale v. State
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtConnor T. Hansen, J.
The facts are not in dispute as they relate to what we believe to be the principal and dispositive issue of this case. The issue presented is a question of law.
The defendant was alleged to have sold a dangerous drug to Kirk Livermore, age twenty, on October 9, 1971, contrary to sec. 161.30 (12) (f), Stats. 1969. He was arraigned on this charge and pleaded guilty on April 5, 1972. A presentence investigation was ordered. Judgment was entered and sentence imposed on May 19, 1972.
Ch. 213, sec. 5, Wisconsin Laws of 1971, became effective March 23, 1972, and provided in part, as follows:
“Wherever…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Dillon v. LinderWisconsin Supreme Court · 1874
- State v. GumberWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
- State v. ConwayWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Thom v. SensenbrennerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
- Miller v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Feest v. Allis-Chalmers Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- State v. HermannCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1991
- State v. ThumsCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2006
- George C. Hibma v. Richard T. Odegaard, James Nikodem, and Michael Paul Szula, and Sawyer County, Wisconsin, InterveningCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- George C. Hibma v. Richard T. Odegaard, James Nikodem, and Michael Paul Szula, and Sawyer County, Wisconsin, InterveningCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985