State v. Hahn

Decision Date09 February 2001
Docket NumberNo. 99-0554-CR.,99-0554-CR.
Citation2001 WI 6,621 N.W.2d 902,241 Wis.2d 85
PartiesSTATE of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. David M. HAHN, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court

¶ 1. PER CURIAM. (on motion for reconsideration).

The State of Wisconsin, plaintiff-respondent, moves the court to reconsider the following sentence in paragraph 28 of its opinion in State v. Hahn, 2000 WI 118, 238 Wis. 2d 889, 618 N.W.2d 528: "If the offender has no means available under state law or is unsuccessful in challenging the prior conviction, the offender may nevertheless seek to reopen the enhanced sentence." The State contends this sentence raises the question of what justification would exist for the defendant to seek to reopen the enhanced sentence if the defendant had unsuccessfully challenged the prior conviction.

¶ 2. To clarify the original Hahn opinion, we now modify the sentence quoted above to read as follows:

If the offender has no means available under state law to challenge the prior conviction on the merits, because, for example, the courts never reached the merits of this challenge under State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis. 2d 168, 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994), or the offender is no longer in custody on the prior conviction, the offender may nevertheless seek to reopen the enhanced sentence.

¶ 3. The motion for reconsideration is denied without costs.

1. See original opinion published in 238 Wis. 2d 889.

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • State v. Verhagen
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Court of Appeals
    • January 23, 2013
    ...case. State v. Hahn, 2000 WI 118, ¶ 28, 238 Wis.2d 889, 618 N.W.2d 528,opinion clarified on denial of reconsideration,2001 WI 6, 241 Wis.2d 85, 621 N.W.2d 902. ¶ 32 With one notable exception—Van Asten's collateral attack, which we shall soon address—the appellants have not argued their pri......
  • State v. Foster
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Supreme Court
    • December 26, 2014
    ...punishment if convicted.”43 But see State v. Hahn, 2000 WI 118, 238 Wis.2d 889, 618 N.W.2d 528, modified on reconsideration, 2001 WI 6, 241 Wis.2d 85, 621 N.W.2d 902 (governing the bases of an offender's challenge at sentencing to a prior conviction).¶ 129 The court of appeals erred in over......
  • State v. Gudgeon
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Court of Appeals
    • June 14, 2006
    ...State v. Hahn, 2000 WI 118, ¶¶ 26-28, 238 Wis.2d 889, 618 N.W.2d 528 (following Custis), modified on other grounds, 2001 WI 6, 241 Wis.2d 85, 621 N.W.2d 902; Boots v. Boots, 73 Wis.2d 207, 216, 243 N.W.2d 225 (1976) rule precludes attacking a judgment in a collateral proceeding unless judgm......
  • State v. Verhagen
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Court of Appeals
    • January 23, 2013
    ...case. State v. Hahn, 2000 WI 118, ¶28, 238 Wis. 2d 889, 618 N.W.2d 528, opinion clarified on denial of reconsideration, 2001 WI 6, 241 Wis. 2d 85, 621 N.W.2d 902. ¶32 With one notable exception—Van Asten's collateral attack, which we shall soon address—the appellants have not argued their p......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT