Opinion ID: 487448
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Mayhem Statute

Text: 20 On its face, the Wisconsin mayhem statute says nothing about great bodily harm. Section 940.21 of the Wisconsin Statutes provides that Whoever, with intent to disable or disfigure another, cuts or mutilates the tongue, eye, ear, nose, lip, limb or other bodily member of another, is guilty of a class B felony. Our inquiry is not confined to the language of the statute, however. Under Wisconsin law, an appellate court's construction of a statute becomes as much a part of the law as if the legislature had enacted it. Champlin v. State, 84 Wis.2d 621, 267 N.W.2d 295 (1978); State ex rel. Klinger & Schilling v. Baird, 56 Wis.2d 460, 202 N.W.2d 31 (1972). Moreover, an officially published opinion of the Wisconsin Court of Appeals has statewide precedential effect. Wis.Stats. Sec. 752.41(2). These rules are binding on us as well, for State courts are the ultimate expositors of their own states' laws and federal courts entertaining petitions for writs of habeas corpus are bound by the construction placed on a state's criminal statutes by the courts of that state except in extreme circumstances, none of which are present here. Mendiola v. Estelle, 635 F.2d 487, 489 (5th Cir.1981). 21 Cole's contention is that the great bodily harm element of mayhem derives from the Wisconsin Court of Appeals decision in Kirby v. State, 86 Wis.2d 292, 272 N.W.2d 113 (Ct.App.1978). To determine whether Cole is correct, we must examine the Kirby decision.