From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Grulich

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Jan 24, 1996
Case Nos. 95-2549-CR, 95-2551-CR, 95-2552-CR (Wis. Ct. App. Jan. 24, 1996)

Opinion

Case Nos. 95-2549-CR, 95-2551-CR, 95-2552-CR.

Opinion Released: January 24, 1996 Opinion Filed: January 24, 1996 This opinion will not be published. See RULE 809.23(1)(b)4, STATS.

APPEAL from judgments of the circuit court for Kenosha County: BARBARA A. KLUKA, Judge. Affirmed.


John W. Grulich appeals from criminal judgments of conviction for his fifteenth and sixteenth operations of a motor vehicle after revocation and for bail jumping. The convictions result from Grulich's pleas of guilty to the charges following the trial court's denial of his motion to dismiss the charges.

The State does not argue that Grulich is barred from taking this appeal because of his guilty pleas. We therefore do not address any possible waiver issue.

On appeal, Grulich contends that the underlying revocations upon which his convictions are premised were for his failure to pay a forfeiture. Based upon § 343.44(2)(e)2, STATS., and State v. Muniz , 181 Wis.2d 928, 512 N.W.2d 252 (Ct. App. 1994), which forbid a criminal prosecution if the underlying revocation or suspension was imposed for a failure to pay a fine or forfeiture, Grulich argues that the trial court erred by refusing to dismiss the complaints.

However, § 343.44(2)(e)2, STATS., provides that the underlying revocation or suspension must have been imposed "solely due to a failure to pay a fine or a forfeiture." (Emphasis added.) And, State v. Biljan , 177 Wis.2d 14, 501 N.W.2d 820 (Ct.App. 1993), holds that if the defendant's failure to pay a fine or forfeiture is not the sole basis for the revocation or suspension, the bar against a criminal prosecution set out in § 343.44(2)(e) does not apply.

Here, the State explains, and the record documents, that Grulich's underlying revocation is based not only on his prior failure to pay a fine or forfeiture, but also on other convictions and the Department of Transportation's further revocation based on its determination that Grulich is a habitual traffic offender. Thus, Grulich's revoked status was not solely based on his failure to pay a fine or forfeiture.

By the Court. — Judgments affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Grulich

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Jan 24, 1996
Case Nos. 95-2549-CR, 95-2551-CR, 95-2552-CR (Wis. Ct. App. Jan. 24, 1996)
Case details for

State v. Grulich

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF WISCONSIN, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. JOHN W. GRULICH…

Court:Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Date published: Jan 24, 1996

Citations

Case Nos. 95-2549-CR, 95-2551-CR, 95-2552-CR (Wis. Ct. App. Jan. 24, 1996)