Summary
The Supreme Court of Wisconsin held that the reduction in maximum confinement penalties under Truth-in-Sentencing II does not constitute a new factor supporting sentence modification for a sentence imposed under Truth-in-Sentencing I. The court concluded that the reduced penalties were not made retroactive and that Wisconsin Statute § 973.195 provided an adequate remedy. The court affirmed the court of appeals' order upholding denial of Jose Trujillo's sentence-modification motion.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether TIS-II's reduction of the maximum confinement penalty for burglary constitutes a new factor permitting modification of a sentence imposed under TIS-I.
- Whether Wis. Stat. § 973.195 provides an adequate statutory remedy for sentencing changes resulting from TIS-II.
- Whether the absence of express retroactive language in TIS-II precludes treating the reduced penalty as relevant to sentence modification.
Holdings
- A reduction in the maximum confinement penalty under TIS-II for the same felony previously sentenced under TIS-I does not constitute a new factor for purposes of sentence modification.
- Wis. Stat. § 973.195 provides an adequate statutory procedure for seeking sentence adjustment based on a post-sentencing change in sentencing law or procedure.
- When a circuit court concludes as a matter of law that the defendant has not established a new factor, it need not determine whether sentence modification is warranted.
Key quotations
“the phrase "new factor" refers to a fact or set of facts highly relevant to the imposition of sentence, but not known to the trial judge at the time of original sentencing” (¶ 13)
“TIS-II's reduced maximum confinement time for the same TIS-I felony does not constitute a new factor when a defendant moves for modification of a sentence imposed under TIS-I.” (¶ 30)
Factual background
Trujillo pleaded guilty in July 2002 to burglary, a Class C felony under TIS-I, and fourth-degree sexual assault, a Class A misdemeanor. The circuit court imposed eight years of confinement and five years of extended supervision for burglary, plus a consecutive nine-month term for the misdemeanor. TIS-II later reclassified burglary and reduced the maximum initial confinement from ten years under TIS-I to seven years and six months; Trujillo's eight-year confinement term therefore exceeded the later maximum by six months.
Procedural history
Trujillo pleaded guilty to burglary and fourth-degree sexual assault and was sentenced under Wisconsin's first truth-in-sentencing scheme. After enactment of TIS-II reduced the maximum confinement applicable to burglary, he moved for sentence modification under Wis. Stat. § 809.30(2)(h), arguing that the statutory reduction was a new factor. The circuit court denied relief, the court of appeals summarily affirmed, and the Wisconsin Supreme Court accepted review and affirmed.