Opinion ID: 1865033
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: purpose of section 974.06(4), stats.

Text: [2-4] The purpose of sec. 974.06(4) is clear: it was designed to compel a prisoner to raise all questions available to him or her in one original, supplemental or amended motion. See Wis. Stats. Ann. sec. 974.06, CommentsL. 1969, c. 255 (West 1985). Any issue not so raised or which has been finally adjudicated on direct appeal may not be the basis of a subsequent motion. The sole exception in subsection (4) occurs when the court determines that a sufficient reason exists which would excuse the failure to raise an issue on direct appeal. The sufficient reason exception extends only to issues of constitutional or jurisdictional dimensions. State v. Klimas, 94 Wis.2d 288, 308, 288 N.W.2d 157 (Ct. App. 1979); State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis.2d 169, 182, 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994). [5] By filing a postconviction motion under sec. 974.02, Braun invoked the jurisdiction of the court. Judge Raskin's dismissal of the postconviction motion was a proper sanction in response to her flouting of the court's jurisdiction. When she escaped during the pendency of her postconviction motion, Braun forfeited all claims she either raised or could have raised in that motion. See Escalona-Naranjo, at 185 Wis.2d at 186. The circuit court was ready to provide Braun with her day in court. Rather than appear and prosecute her appellate rights, she chose to escape and thereby forfeited her right to be heard on the merits of her claims. The dismissal serves as a final adjudication of the postconviction motion and has res judicata effect on future attempts to litigate the same claims. Braun is thereby precluded from renewing her claims by virtue of sec. 974.06(4).