1 COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED June 17, 2008 David R. Schanker Clerk of Court of Appeals NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing. If published, the official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports. A party may file with the Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of Appeals. See WIS. STAT and RULE Appeal No. 2007AP2526 Cir. Ct. No. 2003CF3914 STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT I STATE OF WISCONSIN, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, V. OMAR CARRASQUILLO, A/K/A ERNESTO C. RIVERA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee County: JEFFREY A. WAGNER, Judge. Affirmed. Before Curley, P.J., Wedemeyer and Kessler, JJ. 1 PER CURIAM. Omar Carrasquillo, a/k/a Ernesto Rivera, appeals pro se from an order denying his postconviction motion brought pursuant to WIS.
2 STAT ( ). 1 The circuit court denied the motion as conclusory and unsupported. We affirm, but on the alternative ground that the claim is procedurally barred. Background 2 Carrasquillo entered a no contest plea to one count of second-degree intentional homicide by use of a dangerous weapon. According to Carrasquillo s confession, he struck Robert Puente on the head with a gun, then fired six or seven shots into Puente s chest. On January 26, 2004, the circuit court imposed a thirtyfive year term of imprisonment. 3 With the assistance of postconviction counsel, Carrasquillo moved to withdraw his plea, alleging that he did not know or understand that his plea waived a claim of self-defense. The circuit court denied the motion. On appeal, this court affirmed the order and the judgment of conviction. See State v. Carrasquillo, No. 2004AP2631-CR, unpublished slip op. (WI App May 10, 2006). 4 In August 2007, Carrasquillo filed a second postconviction motion for plea withdrawal. In this motion, he claimed that he did not kill Puente. Rather, Carrasquillo alleged that the emergency room doctor cut Mr. Puente s body halfway open like fish gills experimenting, causing Puente to bleed to death. Carrasquillo alleged that his trial attorney was ineffective by failing to investigate this claim. noted. 1 All references to the Wisconsin Statutes are to the version unless otherwise 2
3 5 The circuit court determined that the evidentiary support for Carrasquillo s allegations consisted of photographs of an unknown individual. The court therefore denied the motion, stating that it contained only conclusory allegations and lacked supporting materials facts, such as medical reports or witness statements explaining the source of Carrasquillo s information. appeal followed. This Discussion 6 Any postconviction claim that could have been raised in a prior proceeding is barred in a subsequent proceeding, absent the defendant demonstrating a sufficient reason for the failure to raise the issue in the first appeal. State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis. 2d 168, , 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994). In the instant proceeding, Carrasquillo claims that his trial counsel was ineffective by failing to investigate negligent medical treatment as a defense to the homicide charge. He asserts that his postconviction counsel s failure to pursue this claim in the first postconviction proceeding was in turn ineffective, and he therefore has a sufficient reason for a second postconviction motion. 7 Ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel may constitute a sufficient reason for an additional postconviction motion pursuant to WIS. STAT See State ex rel. Rothering v. McCaughtry, 205 Wis. 2d 675, 683, 556 N.W.2d 136 (Ct. App. 1996). Implicit in this formulation, however, is that the claim of postconviction counsel s ineffectiveness must be more than an empty incantation. The claim must be accompanied by colorable support to be a sufficient reason for serial litigation. Carrasquillo s claim fails in this regard. 8 A defendant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel must show both that counsel s performance was deficient and that the defendant was 3
4 prejudiced by that deficient performance. See State v. Smith, 207 Wis. 2d 258, 273, 558 N.W.2d 379 (1997). To prove deficient performance, a defendant must show that counsel s specific acts or omissions were outside the wide range of professionally competent assistance. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 690 (1984). To prove prejudice, a defendant must show a reasonable probability that, but for counsel s error, the outcome of the proceeding would have been different. See id. at An attorney is not required to raise every conceivable issue. Counsel has the duty to select the issues that have merit for appeal. See State v. Evans, 2004 WI 84, 30, 273 Wis. 2d 192, 682 N.W.2d 784, abrogated on other grounds by State ex rel. Coleman v. McCaughtry, 2006 WI 49, 29, 290 Wis. 2d 352, 714 N.W.2d 900. [O]nly when ignored issues are clearly stronger than those presented, will the presumption of effective assistance of counsel be overcome. Smith v. Robbins, 528 U.S. 259, 288 (2000) (citation omitted). 10 Carrasquillo s claim that medical negligence was a contributing cause of Puente s death is not a clearly stronger basis for postconviction relief than the claim counsel presented. In a prosecution for second-degree intentional homicide, the State must prove only that the defendant s actions were a substantial factor, not the sole factor, in causing the victim s death. 2 See State v. Block, 170 Wis. 2d 676, 678, 683, 489 N.W.2d 715 (Ct. App. 1992). Consequently, any medical negligence in connection with procedures undertaken in response to a lifethreatening situation created by the defendant does not break the chain of 2 The State originally charged Carrasquillo with first-degree intentional homicide. A conviction for that offense, as for second-degree intentional homicide, requires proof that the defendant s act was a substantial factor in producing the death. WIS JI CRIMINAL
5 causation even though that negligence may have contributed to the victim s death. Id. at 683 (citation omitted). In light of this long-standing doctrine, Carrasquillo s claim for postconviction relief grounded on the assertion that negligent medical treatment contributed to Puente s death is meritless. 11 Carrasquillo s assertion that his postconviction counsel was ineffective is not supported by a colorable showing that counsel s performance was deficient or prejudicial. No attorney is ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim. See State v. Toliver, 187 Wis. 2d 346, 360, 523 N.W.2d 113 (Ct. App. 1994). Therefore, Carrasquillo has not demonstrated a sufficient reason to permit a second postconviction motion. See Rothering, 205 Wis. 2d at 683. Accordingly, his claim is barred. On this ground, we affirm the order of the circuit court. See State v. Holt, 128 Wis. 2d 110, 125, 382 N.W.2d 679 (Ct. App. 1985) (appellate court may affirm on a ground other than that relied on by the lower court). By the Court. Order affirmed. RULE (1)(b)5. This opinion will not be published. See WIS. STAT. 5
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 2012 WI 37 CASE NO.: COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Benjamin C. Butler, Attorney at Law: Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant, v. Benjamin
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MAUREEN ELAINE CHAN, AKA Maureen Ridley, Defendant-Appellant. No. 14-55239 D.C. No.
NO. COA11-482 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 6 March 2012 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Orange County Nos. 08 CRS 872, 53684 DAVID HENRY ROGERS 1. Constitutional Law right to counsel removal of attorney
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, ) ) Respondent, ) 2 CA-CR 2013-0120-PR ) DEPARTMENT B v. ) ) O P I N I O N VAUGHN MILES DENZ, ) ) Petitioner. ) ) FILED BY CLERK
2015 IL App (1st 140175-U SIXTH DIVISION Order filed: August 28, 2015 No. 1-14-0175 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the
2015 IL App (1st) 130852-U No. 1-13-0852 THIRD DIVISION September 2, 2015 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances
2015 WI APP 17 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 2014AP923 Complete Title of Case: PAMELA PETER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF DONALD O. PETER, V.
Case 6:00-cv-06444-DGL-VEB Document 35 Filed 09/11/08 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ANDRE T. McCANTS, -1- -vs- JOSEPH McCOY, Petitioner, REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WYOMING 2015 WY 108 APRIL TERM, A.D. 2015 August 17, 2015 CHESTER LOYDE BIRD, Appellant (Defendant), v. S-15-0059 THE STATE OF WYOMING, Appellee (Plaintiff). Representing
COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION 2013 WI APP 27 Case No.: 2012AP858 Petition for Review filed Complete Title of Case: VICKI L. BLASING, PLAINTIFF, V. ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY AND
PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 94-3344 Complete Title of Case:RICKI A. RITT, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. DENTAL CARE ASSOCIATES, S.C., GREGORY C. SKELDING, D.D.S., AND ST. PAUL FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY,
****************************************************** The officially released date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal
In the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District STEVE AUSTIN, Appellant, v. JOHN SCHIRO, M.D., Respondent. WD78085 OPINION FILED: May 26, 2015 Appeal from the Circuit Court of Clinton County, Missouri
Client or Defense Lawyer: Controlling Trial Strategy After Bergerud by Mark C. Johnson Coordinating Editor Morris Hoffman, Judge for the Second Judicial District Court, Denver As published in the January
Supreme Court of Florida CORRECTED OPINION No. SC93839 PETER VENTURA, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. SC00-583 PETER VENTURA, Petitioner, vs. MICHAEL W. MOORE, etc., et al., Respondents.
Filed 5/3/13 Turner v. Shiomoto CA4/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for
[Cite as State v. Ross, 2014-Ohio-4566.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 100708 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs. LARRY ROSS DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA En Banc DENNIS WAYNE CANION, ) Arizona Supreme Court ) No. CV-04-0243-PR Petitioner, ) ) Court of Appeals v. ) Division One ) No. 1 CA-SA 04-0036 THE HONORABLE DAVID R. COLE, )
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 07-425 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS RITA SENSAT ********** APPEAL FROM THE FOURTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF CALCASIEU, NO. 18,062-06 HONORABLE
MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2013-IA-00181-SCT VICKSBURG HEALTHCARE, LLC d/b/a RIVER REGION HEALTH SYSTEM v. CLARA DEES DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/22/2013 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. ISADORE W. PATRICK, JR.
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Carl Whitehead, : Appellant : : No. 1075 C.D. 2014 v. : : Submitted: November 14, 2014 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania : BEFORE: HONORABLE BONNIE BRIGANCE LEADBETTER,