Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Van Hout v. Endicott

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided September 13, 2006No. 2004AP1192-WPublished

1Per curiam

¶ 1. Perry Van Hout, by counsel, petitions for a writ of habeas corpus under State v. Knight, 168 Wis. 2d 509, 484 N.W.2d 540 (1992). Van Hout contends that he was deprived of an appeal by his appointed appellate counsel's actions and this court's decision to permit appointed appellate counsel to withdraw. Van Hout seeks reinstatement of his Wis. Stat. Rule 809.30 (1995-96) 1 appeal rights from a 1995 conviction. Van Hout's petition is properly filed in this court. State ex rel. Smalley v. Morgan, 211 Wis. 2d 795, 798-99, 565 N.W.2d 805 (Ct. App. 1997), criticized on other grounds by State ex…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Jones v. BarnesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. State v. KnightWisconsin Supreme Court · 1992
  5. State Ex Rel. Flores v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1994

10 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