Wisconsin Attorney General Office January 2010

As to the merits of Lee's claims, it is true that his judgment of conviction contains sentences for crimes committed prior to December 31, 1999 (counts 1 and 3), which implicate Wisconsin's old, indeterminate sentencing scheme.  Under that old scheme, absent extenuating circumstances, offenders were released on parole after serving two-thirds of their court imposed sentence.  Wis. Stat. 302.11.

However, Lee's judgment of conviction also contains sentences for crimes committed after December 31, 1999 (counts 2, 4-15), which implicate Wisconsin current determinate sentencing scheme know as truth-in-sentencing.  Under the current scheme, there is no parole, and offenders must spend the entire term of their initial confinement in prison.  Wis. Stat. 973.01.

Because the circuit court in Lee's case ordered all his sentences to run concurrent with one another, Lee is required to serve the period of confinement in prison under the indeterminate sentences (up to two-thirds of seven years) concurrent with the period of confinement under the determinate sentence (the full seven years).  Thus, in order to satisfy all of his sentences, Lee is required to serve seven years in prison beginning the day of his sentencing, which was November 9, 2005, less any sentence credit.

Under the indeterminate sentences the confinement portion is two-thirds of seven years...what happened to the other required one-third of those sentences?  I am currently serving extended supervision (parole) under counts 2, 4-12, according to the courts.  The required parole portion of counts 1 and 3 was served in prison and the required extended supervision portion (parole) for counts 13, 14, and 15 was also served in prison according to the Discharge Certificate issued by the Secretary of Prisons July 27, 2012.  All the sentences were current to count 1, it has expired, completed, done with, no longer in existence. This is the United States of America where all are treated fairly and equal.