STATE OF WISCONSIN, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. TOMMY DONNELL FORREST, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT., 2006 WI App 1

Summary

A competency evaluation and report indicated that defendant was competent. Defendant argued that his plea was not knowingly entered because he was not informed of the effect of truth-in-sentencing. The appellate court ruled that the trial court did not err in failing to inform defendant of the "day for day" effect of truth-in-sentencing. Since defendant's complaint was that the trial court did not inform him about a collateral consequence of his plea--that there was no parole or good time under truth-in-sentencing--defendant's argument was without merit. Defendant's mistaken belief about the truth-in-sentencing law was not a basis for plea withdrawal. The trial court was expected to inform defendant of all the direct consequences of a plea, but was not required to inform him of all the collateral consequences of a plea. Also, defendant failed to adequately develop his claim that his insanity plea had not been properly withdrawn. Defendant failed to adequately brief the issue and did ...