District IV
July 3, 2013
To:
Hon. Andrew P. Bissonnette
Circuit Court Judge
Justice Facility
210 West Center St.
Juneau, WI 53039
Lynn M. Hron
Clerk of Circuit Court
Dodge Co. Justice Facility
210 West Center Street
Juneau, WI 53039
Kurt F. Klomberg
District Attorney
Dodge County
210 W. Center Street
Juneau, WI 53039
Nancy A. Noet
Assistant Attorney General
P.O. Box 7857
Madison, WI 53707-7857
Raymond M. Sabbatini 483617
Fox Lake Corr. Inst.
P.O. Box 200
Fox Lake, WI 53933-0200
You are hereby notified that the Court has entered the following opinion and order:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State of Wisconsin v. Raymond M. Sabbatini (L.C. # 2004CF377) |
|
|
|
|
|
Before Higginbotham,
Sherman and Blanchard, JJ.
Raymond Sabbatini appeals an order of the circuit
court denying his petition for adjustment to his sentence in Dodge County
Circuit Court case number 2004CF377.
Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at
conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See
Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21 (2011-12).[1] We summarily affirm.
We begin by noting that Sabbatini’s brief fails to
comply with the standard requirements set forth in Wis. Stat. Rule 809.19 in several ways. In particular, the brief does not contain
citations to the record to support Sabbatini’s factual allegations, nor does it
contain relevant legal citations to support his arguments. “A party must do more than simply toss a
bunch of concepts into the air” and hope that the court or the opposing party
will arrange them into viable theories supported by fact and law. State v. Jackson, 229 Wis. 2d 328,
337, 600 N.W.2d 39 (Ct. App. 1999). Wisconsin Stat. Rule 809.83(2) provides us
with the authority to strike a paper as a sanction for noncompliance with any
appellate rule. Accordingly, Sabbatini’s
brief is hereby stricken for failure to comply with the appellate briefing
rules set forth in Wis. Stat. Rule
809.19, and we summarily affirm the order of the circuit court. However, even if the brief were not stricken,
we would still affirm the circuit court, as explained below.
Sabbatini filed a petition for positive adjustment time
under Wis. Stat. § 973.198. That statute allows the circuit court to convert
the “time remaining in the term of confinement in prison portion of the
sentence” to extended supervision time. Wis. Stat. § 973.198(5). Initially, the circuit court granted
Sabbatini’s petition in an order entered February 14, 2012. However, the Department of Corrections
responded with a letter requesting clarification of the order, due to the fact
that Sabbatini had already completed the confinement in prison portion of his
sentence in case number 2004CF377 prior to the filing of his petition. The circuit court entered a new order on
April 4, 2012, nullifying its prior order and concluding that Sabbatini was not
entitled to any positive adjustment time because it was impossible to reduce
the confinement portion of a sentence after the confinement portion had already
been served.
We agree. The
record reflects that Sabbatini completed the confinement portion of his
sentence in case number 2004CF377 on July 1, 2011, but did not file his
petition for sentence adjustment in that case until December 27, 2011. The statute under which Sabbatini sought
adjustment to his sentence contemplates that a term of confinement in prison
may be reduced “by the amount of time remaining in the term of confinement in
prison portion of the sentence, less up to 30 days[.]” Wis.
Stat. § 973.198(5). Without
any time remaining on the confinement portion of Sabbatini’s sentence in case
number 2004CF377, the circuit court could not grant Sabbatini positive
adjustment time according to the method stated in Wis. Stat. § 973.198(5).
IT IS ORDERED that the order is summarily affirmed under Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21(1).
Diane M. Fremgen
Clerk of Court of Appeals