State v. Tabitha A. Scruggs

¶ 1.

ANN WALSH BRADLEY, J.

Petitioner, Tabitha Scruggs ("Scruggs"), seeks review of a published court of appeals decision denying her motion for postconviction relief.1 The court of appeals determined *318that Scruggs failed to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that imposing a now mandatory $250 DNA surcharge for a single felony conviction constitutes a punishment, violating the prohibition against ex post facto laws set forth in the United States and Wisconsin Constitutions.

¶ 2. Specifically, Scruggs contends that the imposition of this single $250 DNA surcharge is punitive for ex post facto…