Opinion
No. 2012AP2329–CR.
2013-11-13
STATE of Wisconsin, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. DAVID L., Defendant–Appellant.
See id., 2005 WI App 68, ¶ 9, 280 Wis.2d at 739–740, 697 N.W.2d at 105–106 (citation omitted). We will not disturb the trial court's conclusion that David L.'s cooperation with law enforcement established a new factor. We disagree that the trial court created any such test. The trial court was required to consider the facts to determine whether the new factor justified sentence modification. The trial court's comments reflect that it considered the cooperation David L. provided in the past and more recently, but it did not state that if David L.'s current cooperation was not greater than or equal to that provided before, he was not entitled to sentence modification. Rather, the trial court's comments reflect a consideration of many issues, including the level of David L.'s cooperation, his rehabilitation, the facts of David L.'s crime, and other factors. We reject David L.'s argument.