State v. Jamal L. Williams
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRebecca Grassl Bradley, J.
*667¶ 1 We review a petition by the State and a cross-petition by Jamal L. Williams challenging the court of appeals' decision, which held: (1) the mandatory $250 DNA surcharge the circuit court ordered Williams to pay violated the Ex Post Facto Clauses of the Wisconsin and United States Constitutions; and (2) the circuit court did not rely on an improper factor when it sentenced Williams.1 The State and Williams each petitioned for review on the issues decided against them. The State claims the DNA surcharge statute does not violate the *668Ex Post Facto Clauses and Williams claims the sentencing…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Kennedy v. Mendoza-MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Kansas v. HendricksSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Alabama v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Smith v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- State v. Octavia W. DodsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 2022
- State v. Anthony M. SchmidtWisconsin Supreme Court · 2021
- State v. Anthony M. SchmidtWisconsin Supreme Court · 2021
- Dodson v. CromwellDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2023
- State v. FreibothCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2018
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.