State v. Merten
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
1Opinion of the CourtRoggensack, J.
¶ 1. Hank Merten appeals the judgment of conviction for delivery of a controlled substance, Tetrahydrocannabinols (THC), as party to the crime, contrary to Wis. Stat. §§ 961.41(l)(h)l and 939.05 (2001-02) 1 , and the court order denying post-conviction relief. Merten argues that his no contest plea was unknowingly and involuntarily made because the circuit court failed to inform him that his conviction would result in ineligibility for federal health care programs under 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7(a)(4). We conclude that the effect of § 1320a-7(a)(4) is a collateral consequence of Merten's plea; and…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Brady v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Joseph Torrey v. Wayne EstelleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- State v. BolligWisconsin Supreme Court · 2000
- State Ex Rel. Warren v. SchwarzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1998
- State v. McCallumWisconsin Supreme Court · 1997
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2004
- State v. HardenCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2005
- State v. RadovanicOhio Court of Appeals · 2013