Archive for the ‘pro se litigant’ Category

Richard Wanke’s Appeal to the US Supreme Court!

Posted: September 3, 2020 by parchangelo in "Eyewitness Testimony", 2008 Clark murder investigation, Attorney Barton Henbest, Attorney Nick Zimmerman, Greg Clark, Greg Clark Murder, Greg Lindmark, Gregory Clark's murder, Gregory Lindmark, High profile criminal defense, IDOC, IL Dept of Corrections and Coronavirus, Police Misconduct, pro se litigant, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Richard Wanke, Richard's Cases, rockford attorney murder, Rockford Police Department, State's Attorney Joe Bruscato, The Causes of Wrongful Convictions, The wrongful conviction of Richard Wanke, Winnebago County Public Defender, Winnebago County Public Defender Investigator Robert Faulkner, Wrongful Convictions
0

Richard Wanke has recently submitted a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court. The appeal filing was due this week after an extension was granted by the Court due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Writ was authored by the defendant pro se, meaning an attorney has not been appointed in this appeal thus far. Due to delays, the Clerk of the Court has indicated that in may be some time before a decision is rendered. The Court has assigned the appeal case number 20 – 5519 and the proceedings can be followed (here) and the Writ of Certiorari can be read here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20-5519.html.

 

• A Writ of Certiorari asks the US Supreme Court to review legal disputes. The US Supreme Court is asked to review a large number of issues but only accepts for review about 1% of the cases submitted to it. The chance of Richard Wanke’s (or any defendant’s) Writ of Certiorari being accepted by the US Supreme Court is miniscule. While there are many issues of appeal in most criminal cases, the courts work to narrow review down to only a few issues in each case. A Writ of Certiorari is really the “Hail Mary” of the criminal appeal process and the last stage of trying to appeal issues present in court records. Most criminal appeals don’t win at this point but at the next stage, in a Post-Conviction Petition where the defendant, for the first time, has the chance to raise the issues which are NOT documented in the case record but which probably most directly resulted in the conviction.

 

A Questionable Coincidence, from the perspective of a defendant.

Posted: February 5, 2015 by smallmouth63 in 2008 Clark murder investigation, Attorney needed: high-profile case, Greg Clark Murder, High profile criminal defense, Legal assistance needed, Local Issues, pro se litigant, Richard "Speaks"
1

The Richard Wanke prosecution clock ticks on for his April 2014 demand for a speedy trial.  Yet his case has been delayed and continued due to “inclement weather”, the illness of his assigned Public Defender, and now again, for personal reasons by the judge who has set the next court date for Friday, February 6, 2015, at 1:30 pm in courtroom 478 of the Winnebago County Courthouse, located at 400 West State Street, in Rockford, IL.

This rescheduled hearing on the disqualification of the Winnebago County Public Defenders office has languished for more than 60 days as Richard’s conflicted counsel walks the fine line between advocating for his offices’s removal from Richard’s representation to protecting it from having to air dirty laundry in public (such as the details of its own involvement in it’s client’s arrest). This divided loyalty lies at the crux of this Friday’s hearing.

Karen Sorensen, the head Public Defender of Winnebago County, withdrew from the case in 2008 citing conflicts-of- interest, and other experienced public defenders who knew the murder victim have also stepped back from the case. Attorney Gregory Clark, was highly respected and well-connected locally. Inadvertent coincidence or not, the wisdom of  scheduling this hearing, critical to decide the very constitutional direction of the defendant’s case, on the exact day of attorney Clark’s death, seven years ago is questionable; at least it is to this defendant.

As Richard Wanke states, “I have been held responsible and without bail in some sense since 2008 in this case and my charging in April 2014, was just the formality of my on-going ordeal. And, so far, while I have also filed a speedy trial demand and repeatedly requested conflict-free counsel, I have yet to receive either. And, somehow, I feel that I am not the only Winnebago County defendant exposed to an unusual degree of jeopardy in the county legal process.”