2001 WI 56

 

SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN

 

 

Case No.:           98-3139-CR

 

 

Complete Title

of Case:          


State of Wisconsin,

     Plaintiff-Respondent-Petitioner,

     v.

Ondra Bond,

     Defendant-Appellant.

 

 

REVIEW OF A DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS

2000 WI App 118

Reported at:  237 Wis. 2d 633, 614 N.W.2d 552

(Published)

 


 

Opinion Filed:             

Submitted on Briefs:          

Oral Argument:       May 2, 2001

 

 

Source of APPEAL

                COURT:      Circuit

                COUNTY:     Milwaukee

                JUDGE:       Jeffrey A. Wagner

 

 

JUSTICES:

                Concurred:          

                Dissented:          

                Not Participating:  SYKES, J., did not participate.

 

 

ATTORNEYS:        For the petitioner-respondent-petitioner the cause was argued by Marguerite M. Moeller, assistant attorney general, with whom on the briefs was James E. Doyle, attorney general.

 

                For the defendant-appellant there was a brief and oral argument by Ellen Henak, assistant state public defender.

 


2001 WI 56

 

NOTICE

This opinion is subject to further editing and modification.  The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports.

 

 

No.  98-3139-CR

 

STATE OF WISCONSIN                    :      IN SUPREME COURT

 

FILED

 

MAY 31, 2001

 

Cornelia G. Clark

Clerk of Supreme Court

Madison, WI

 

 

 

 

 

 
 


State of Wisconsin,

 

          Plaintiff-Respondent-Petitioner,

 

     v.

 

Ondra Bond,

 

          Defendant-Appellant.

 

 


REVIEW of a decision of the Court of Appeals.  Affirmed.

 

1   PER CURIAM.   The court is equally divided on whether to affirm or reverse the decision of the court of appeals.  Chief Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson, Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, and Justice David T. Prosser would affirm; Justice William A. Bablitch, Justice Jon P. Wilcox, and Justice N. Patrick Crooks would reverse.  Justice Diane S. Sykes did not participate.

2   Accordingly, the decision of the court of appeals is affirmed.