Legal Opinion

State v. Muniz

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided January 25, 1994No. 93-2147-CRPublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMyse, J.

Mauro Muniz appeals a trial court judgment convicting him of operating after revocation (OAR), second offense, in violation of § 343.44(1), STATS., and imposing criminal penalties under § 343.44(2)(b)l. Muniz contends that the trial court erred by imposing criminal penalties under § 343.44(2)(b)l because the only suspension in effect at the time of the current violation was imposed for failure to pay a forfeiture. Because we conclude that the only suspension in effect at the time of the current violation was imposed solely for failure to pay a forfeiture, even though Muniz failed to reinstate…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. Hoa Duc PhamWisconsin Supreme Court · 1987
  2. State v. BiljanCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1993

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. BizzleCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1998
  2. State v. RardonCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1994
  3. State v. Trent N.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1997
  4. State v. HansonWisconsin Supreme Court · 2001
  5. State v. HansonWisconsin Supreme Court · 2001

1 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