Opinion ID: 2162481
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: District Attorney's Conduct.

Text: The defendant alleges that certain conduct and comments of the district attorney prejudiced his defense. It would serve no useful purpose to detail the circumstances surrounding the numerous motions for mistrial made by the defense. It should suffice to say that the case was hard fought by both parties. The defense presented no witnesses, but sought to establish the incompetency of the young district attorney to the folks of the jury. The trial court denied each and every defense motion for a mistrial and gave the standard precautionary instruction on a few occasions. In Oseman v. State (1966), 32 Wis. 2d 523, 528, 145 N. W. 2d 766, this court stated: The motion [for mistrial] is addressed to the discretion of the trial court and an appellate court will not reverse unless there has been abuse of discretion. The evidence for conviction on all three charges in this case was overwhelming. We are not convinced, from reading the record, that the district attorney was guilty of any impropriety. By the Court. Judgment and order affirmed.