State v. Stewart, 836 N.W.2d 456

Stewart pled guilty to three offenses as a repeater, in exchange for the State's dismissal of two counts and a global 25-year sentence recommendation.
At sentencing, the prosecutor reiterated the 25-year global sentence and officers who were victims provided impact statements requesting maximum sentences.
The circuit court imposed a total sentence with counts two and one running consecutive and count three concurrent, based in part on the victim impact statements.
Stewart later filed a Wis. Stat. § 809.30 postconviction motion arguing the State breached the plea by the officers' requests for maximum sentencing.
The circuit court denied the postconviction motion; Stewart appeals, arguing breach of the plea agreement and ineffective assistance of counsel.
The court distinguishes Matson on facts, holding that the officers spoke as crime victims, not as state agents, and thus there was no breach.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did the State breach the plea by the officers’ maximum-sentence requests?	Stewart	Stewart	No material breach; officers spoke as victims, not as state agents.
What remedy follows if a breach occurred?	Stewart seeks remand for a new sentencing with a different judge.	State	Remand not warranted; Matson distinguished; uphold denial of postconviction motion.
Was there ineffective assistance of counsel based on the alleged breach?	Stewart	Stewart	No ineffective assistance; no breach found, so no deficient performance.

State v. Matson, 674 N.W.2d 51 (Wis. 2003) (investigative officer’s breach when letter tied to state agency; differs when victims speak)
State v. Williams, 249 Wis.2d 492 (Wis. 2002) (breach requires material and substantial violation; de novo review)
State v. Liukonen, 686 N.W.2d 689 (Wis. App. 2004) (prosecutor may provide aggravating information even with capped recommendation)
State v. Harvey, 710 N.W.2d 482 (Wis. App. 2006) (disavowal of victim’s statement not mandated but allowed; victim statements permitted)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. Supreme Court 1984) (ineffective assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)