Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State v. Brandon M. Melton

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided July 11, 2013No. 2011AP001771-CRPublished

1ConcurrenceAnnette Kingsland Ziegler, J.

¶ 82.

(concurring). I concur with the majority and write separately to clarify that under the right circumstances, albeit rare, the circuit court has authority to destroy a PSI. It is not unusual for a defendant to dispute certain contents of a PSI, and here, the defendant lodged very specific complaints, to specific paragraphs, on specific pages. The record here, however, does not support destruction of the PSI. Given these objections, a court typically might strike those disputed portions from the PSI and explain that those matters would not be considered for purposes of sentencing.

*83¶ 83. Our…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. HenleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2010
  2. State v. MeltonCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API