State v. Bonds
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1ConcurrenceShirley S. Abrahamson, C.J.
¶ 55. (concurring) . I agree with the result reached by the court: The repeater enhancement to the defendant's sentence *379must be vacated. The State's significant amendment of the repeater allegation after a guilty verdict is prohibited by Wis. Stat. § 973.12(1).
¶ 56. I write separately to express my disagreement with the court's rewriting of Wis. Stat. § 973.12(1) to allow significant amendments to the charging documents after a guilty verdict.
¶ 57. I also write separately to explain that CCAP data are not an official report under Wis. Stat. § 973.12(1) and therefore CCAP data alone are…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- State v. MartinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1991
- State v. SaundersWisconsin Supreme Court · 2002
- State v. JenningsWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
- State v. GerardWisconsin Supreme Court · 1995
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.