District II/IV
May 17, 2013
To:
Hon. Timothy M. Van Akkeren
Circuit Court Judge
Sheboygan County Courthouse
615 N. 6th Street
Sheboygan, WI 53081
Nan Todd
Clerk of Circuit Court
Sheboygan County Courthouse
615 N. 6th Street
Sheboygan, WI 53081
Martha K. Askins
Asst. State Public Defender
P.O. Box 7862
Madison, WI 53707-7862
Joseph R. DeCecco
District Attorney
615 N. 6th St.
Sheboygan, WI 53081
Gregory M. Weber
Assistant Attorney General
P.O. Box 7857
Madison, WI 53707-7857
Jalen M. Ringel 526619
Kettle Moraine Corr. Inst.
P.O. Box 282
Plymouth, WI 53073-0282
You are hereby notified that the Court has entered the following opinion and order:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State of Wisconsin v. Jalen M. Ringel (L.C. #2011CF376) |
|
|
|
|
|
Before Sherman, Blanchard and Kloppenburg, JJ.
Attorney Martha Askins, appointed counsel for Jalen Ringel, has filed a no-merit report pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Wis. Stat. Rule 809.32 (2011-12).[1] Counsel provided Ringel with a copy of the report, and both counsel and this court advised him of his right to file a response. Ringel has not responded. We conclude that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21(1). After our independent review of the record, we conclude there is no arguable merit to any issue that could be raised on appeal.
Ringel pled no contest to one count of burglary while armed. The court imposed a sentence of three years of initial confinement and two years of extended supervision.
The no-merit report addresses whether Ringel’s plea was entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently. The plea colloquy sufficiently complied with the requirements of State v. Bangert, 131 Wis. 2d 246, 389 N.W.2d 12 (1986), and Wis. Stat. § 971.08 relating to the nature of the charge, the rights Ringel was waiving, and other matters. The record shows no other ground to withdraw the plea. There is no arguable merit to this issue.
The no-merit report addresses whether the court erroneously exercised its sentencing discretion. The standards for the circuit court and this court on sentencing issues are well-established and need not be repeated here. See State v. Gallion, 2004 WI 42, ¶¶17-51, 270 Wis. 2d 535, 678 N.W.2d 197. In this case, the court considered appropriate factors such as the seriousness of the offense, the effect on the victims, and Ringel’s prior record. The court did not consider improper factors, and reached a reasonable result. The sentence was well below the statutory maximum. There is no arguable merit to this issue.
Our review of the record discloses no other potential issues for appeal.
Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is summarily affirmed. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21(1).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Attorney Askins is relieved of further representation of Ringel in this matter. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.32(3).
Diane M. Fremgen
Clerk of Court of Appeals