Opinion ID: 2038627
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Inherent Power of the Courts

Text: ¶ 11. Courts have those inherent powers that are necessary to enable the judiciary to accomplish its constitutionally or legislatively mandated functions. State ex rel. Friedrich v. Circuit Court for Dane County , 192 Wis. 2d 1, 16, 531 N.W.2d 32 (1995). The power to modify a sentence is one of the judiciary's inherent powers. Hayes v. State , 46 Wis. 2d 93, 101, 175 N.W.2d 625 (1970). [9] This power is exercised to prevent the continuation of unjust sentences. State v. Franklin , 148 Wis. 2d 1, 9, 434 N.W.2d 609 (1989). ¶ 12. However, a circuit court's inherent authority to modify a sentence is a discretionary power that is exercised within defined parameters. For example, a court has the power to correct formal or clerical errors or an illegal or a void sentence at any time, Hayes , 46 Wis. 2d at 101-02. Also, a court has the inherent authority to modify a sentence if a new factor is presented, id. at 103, or if the sentence is unduly harsh or unconscionable. Cresci v. State , 89 Wis. 2d 495, 504, 278 N.W.2d 850 (1979); State v. Grindemann , 2002 WI App 106, ¶ 21, 255 Wis. 2d 632, 648 N.W.2d 507. However, there must be some finality to the imposition of a sentence. See State v. Wuensch , 69 Wis. 2d 467, 480, 230 N.W.2d 665 (1975). Therefore, we have held that it would be an erroneous exercise of discretion to modify a sentence simply because upon reflection the court may have chosen a different one. Scott v. State , 64 Wis. 2d 54, 59, 218 N.W.2d 350 (1974). Similarly, a court cannot set a harsh sentence to shock the defendant, while intending to reduce the sentence after the defendant has fully realized the loss of liberty he faces. See Wuensch , 69 Wis. 2d at 480 (stating, [t]he trial court cannot change the sentence upon mere reflection or indulge in `shock treatment').