Top Racine Appeal Attorney
Hire an appeals attorney with a winning record.
You have the right to appeal your conviction or sentence:
Wisconsin law permits a defendant to appeal his or her sentence or conviction. This permissive appellate right extends to a defendant whether he or she entered a guilty plea or a jury found him or her guilty. Sometimes, a defendant seeks to challenge an earlier evidentiary or motion hearing issue that affected the trial or decision to enter a guilty plea. Regardless, many defendants have a strong interest in challenging their conviction. They should hire a successful appeal attorney, like the team at Richards & Dimmer, S.C.
Richards & Dimmer has experience in the wide range of post-conviction appeals.
Here is a list of the range of appeals we have pursued on behalf of our clients over the last 30 years:
- Interlocutory appeal seeking relief of a trial court decision on the admissibility of evidence;
- Writ of Certiorari, which our clients seek when the Division of Hearings and Appeals has ordered that our clients' supervision should be revoked
- Post-conviction motions challenging the performance and effectiveness of trial counsel;
- Post-conviction motions seeking the withdrawal of a guilty plea based upon a faulty plea colloquy or information unknown to the client at the time of the plea hearing;
- Post-conviction motions seeking a new sentencing hearing based upon new information or inaccurate information that the sentencing court relied upon;
- Writs of Habeas Corpus, seeking federal relief of a Wisconsin decision denying relief to our clients;
- Petitions for review before the United States Supreme Court - asking for the Court to take up a longstanding legal issue (e.g. Community Caretaker Exception).
Richards & Dimmer has a track record of winning appeals for our clients.
As experienced appeal attorneys, Richards & Dimmer has had the opportunity to argue cases before the Wisconsin Supreme Court, 7th Circuit, and Federal Court. We have a winning record to prove why you should hire us as y our appeal attorney!
Here are the cases where Richards & Dimmer has successfully argued for appellate relief on behalf of our clients:
- State of Wisconsin v. Tye, 248 Wis.2d 530, 636 N.W.2d 473, 2001 WI 124 (2001), a case regarding a search warrant that Attorney Richards successfully argued before the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
- State v. Adrial White, Racine County Circuit Court Case #2006CF95, our firm was successful in overturning a jury verdict and the life-sentence on one count of 1st Degree Intentional Homicide While Armed and one count of Attempted 2nd Degree Intentional Homicide While Armed.
- State v. David Scott, Kenosha County Circuit Court Case #2007CF228, our firm’s post-conviction motion at the trial court level was successful in obtaining a new trial for our client and overturning a jury verdict and 15 year prison sentence on two separate counts of 1st Degree Sexual Assault of a Child, and a count of Sexual Assault of a Child under the Age of 13. The State appealed the trial court’s decision in State v. Scott, No. 2009AP3072-CR (Wis. App. 12/29/2010), and in its unpublished decision our firm convinced the Court of Appeals a new trial was warranted. In February 2012, Attorney Mark Richards re-tried that case, and the client was acquitted of all charges.
- State v. C.J., Racine County Circuit Court Case #11CFXXX. Attorney Richards successfully challenged a court ruling regarding a complainant's treatment records. The appeal went up to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, where Attorney Richards successfully argued, for the second time, that his client's case should prevail. On remand, the case was resolved without trial and without felony charges.
- State v. C.M., Kenosha County Circuit Court Case #2012CF81. Most recently, Attorney Richards and Attorney Dimmer appealed an invasion into our client's home and his locked upstairs room. The appeal focused on whether the "community caretaker doctrine" entitled law enforcement to enter the locked room to determine whether any persons inside needed assistance. Although successful at the court of appeals, the Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed the decision (after originally tying 3-3). We appealed the case to the United States Supreme Court. Unfortunately, our case was not one of the petitions granted by the Supreme Court.
- State v. Dartavian Watson, Racine County Circuit Court Case #15CF1495. Attorneys Dimmer and Richards challenged the blood draw obtained from the client after a vehicular accident. The trial court ruled that the blood draw was reasonable and authorized under Wisconsin statutes and the Fourth Amendment. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals, in an uncontested decision, reversed the trial court and found that the officers unreasonably took the client's blood. The client was released from custody after the appeal.
- State v. Michael Garcia, Racine County Circuit Court Case #15CF1675. Attorney Dimmer argued that the sentencing court had erroneously considered claims that the client stole his mother's welfare funds to fuel his drug addiction. After investigating the claim, Attorney Dimmer filed a post-conviction motion to address the claim and seek re-sentencing. The court agreed that the court had considered this fact, agreed that the claim was inaccurate, and agreed to modify the client's sentence.