Opinion ID: 6112703
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Octavia Dodson & His Crime

Text: ¶34 As acknowledged by the sentencing judge, Dodson was a model citizen before committing this crime.4 A hard-working employee and a good father, Dodson had no criminal history.5 Like 3 The majority does not address Article I, Section 25 of the Wisconsin Constitution even though Dodson raised it. Dodson's Br. at 16. 4 R. 73:32. 5 R. 17:9–12; R. 73:32. 5 No. 2018AP1476-CR.rgb millions of other model citizens, Dodson chose to keep and bear arms. In 2014, he became a concealed carry permit-holder after completing all state-mandated training.6 In the sentencing judge's personal view, Dodson's decision to purchase and carry a firearm somehow impaired his virtue, an opinion utterly antithetical to founding principles underlying the explicit constitutional protection afforded the natural right to keep and bear arms. ¶35 The sentencing judge would have us believe that each day Dodson exercised his right to keep and bear arms, he menaced society. For the sentencing judge, Dodson's lawful, constitutionally-protected conduct before the crime overshadowed the crime itself. With no grounding in reality, the sentencing judge hypothesized that gun owners possess an increased propensity for violence triggered by a purportedly paranoid worldview, clouded by misperceptions of non-existent threats. In applying his own distorted views of gun owners in this case, the sentencing judge impermissibly stereotyped Dodson. ¶36 In March 2016, Dodson, a Black man, was the victim of a hit and run.7 The driver of a Buick rear-ended him and then drove away. Dodson tried to follow the fleeing Buick, but he lost sight of it. Minutes after the collision, Dodson spotted Deshun Freeman's Buick, which, contrary to Dodson's belief at the time, probably was not the Buick involved in the hit and run. After Dodson followed Freeman's Buick, Freeman pulled over and exited R. 1:4. The state requires extensive training. 6 See Wis. Stat. § 175.60(4)(a) (2013–14). 7 R. 1:3 & n.2. 6 No. 2018AP1476-CR.rgb his vehicle. As the majority notes, the two men were standing only about two car-lengths away.8 Freeman moved toward Dodson, yelling racial epithets.9 Mistakenly thinking Freeman was armed, Dodson shot Freeman multiple times with a handgun, which he was lawfully carrying as a concealed carry permit-holder. Freeman died. A few hours later, Dodson surrendered himself to the police. ¶37 For apparent dramatic effect, the majority emphasizes that Dodson swapped out his pistol's ten-round magazine for an extended 17-round magazine as he was searching for the Buick.10 So what? The sentencing judge did not even mention this irrelevant fact, but merely noted Dodson purchased an extended magazine, without discussing how Dodson used it.11 The conflation of lawful purchase and possession with unlawful use is the central problem with the sentencing judge's remarks (and the majority's approval of them). ¶38 No one has suggested the magazine was atypical, much less illegal. To the contrary, such magazines are fairly ordinary and popular. See Miller v. Bonta, __ F. Supp. 3d __, 2021 WL 2284132  (S.D. Cal.), appeal filed (Like the Swiss Army Knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home 8 Majority op., ¶3. The majority fails to mention Dodson is a Black man and 9 merely says Freeman yelled an obscenity[.] Id., ¶4. The majority employs euphemisms. Understanding why Dodson may have perceived a threat——even if one did not, in fact, exist——is critical to understanding his actual culpability. 10 Id., ¶3; see also id., ¶15. 11 R. 73:30–31. 7 No. 2018AP1476-CR.rgb defense weapon and homeland defense equipment. . . . This case is not about extraordinary weapons lying at the outer limits of Second Amendment protection. The banned 'assault weapons' are not bazookas, howitzers, or machineguns. Those arms are dangerous and solely useful for military purposes. Instead, the firearms deemed 'assault weapons' are fairly ordinary, popular, modern rifles.). ¶39 More fundamentally, even if there were something unusual about a 17-round magazine, it would have no bearing on this case. Would Dodson be less culpable in the majority's view if he had used a ten-round magazine instead? The majority doesn't say. Perhaps it deems a ten-round magazine less scary. Regardless of the majority's feelings toward guns, our constitutions do not countenance Wisconsinites being punished more harshly for lawfully carrying weapons a judge deems insufficiently mundane. ¶40 The State charged Dodson with second-degree intentional homicide by unnecessary defensive force and sought a penalty enhancer for use of a dangerous weapon. The penalty enhancer related to Dodson's use of the firearm, and had nothing to do with the extended magazine. Dodson pled guilty in exchange for the State dismissing the penalty enhancer and agreeing to seek a substantial prison term rather than a specific sentence.12 ¶41 The majority fails to mention the presentence writer recommended a sentence of five to nine years of initial confinement followed by five to six years of extended supervision—— 12 R. 70:2–3; see also R. 13:2. 8 No. 2018AP1476-CR.rgb substantially less than the sentence Dodson received.13 The presentence writer noted, Mr. Dodson expressed sincere remorse for his behavior, and was tearful in expressing his desire to go back in time.14 The presentence writer emphasized the incident happened [i]n the flash of a second and seemed to believe Dodson was in fear for his life.15