Court Opinion

ID: 9520089
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 01:31:10.705176+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:45:31.589542
License: Public Domain

SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, J.
(dissenting). Wisconsin, unlike other states, does not have a statute providing that the penalty for robbery committed by pretence of being armed is the same as for a robbery committed while armed. We said in Dickenson v. State, 75 Wis.2d 47, 50, 248 N.W.2d 447 (1977), that “[t]here is much to recommend such a statute .... However, this is a question which must be addressed to the legislature. We are not entitled to rewrite the statute so as to conform to our view of what an appropriate penalty should be.”
The facts adduced at trial in the case at bar do not support a conviction for armed robbery. The majority opinion is inconsistent with prior cases in which we held that the defendant’s threat that he was armed was not sufficient to uphold a conviction for armed robbery if there was no evidence that the object was in fact a dangerous weapon. See Davis v. State, 93 Wis.2d 319, 286 N.W.2d 570 (1980).