782.09 was inappropriate. J.V. v. Barron, 112 Wis. 2d 256, 332 N.W.2d 796 (1983). Habeas corpus is available to a petitioner to challenge a criminal complaint and to test the sufficiency of evidence for bindover. State ex rel. McCaffrey v. Shanks, 124 Wis. 2d 216, 369 N.W.2d 743 (Ct. App. 1985). See also State ex rel. Cornellier v. Black, 144 Wis. 2d 745, 425 N.W.2d 21 (Ct. App. 1988). A defendant’s prejudicial deprivation of appellate counsel, be it the fault of the attorney or the appellate court, is properly remedied by a petition for habeas corpus in the supreme court. State ex rel. Fuentes v. Court of Appeals, 225 Wis. 2d 446, 593 N.W.2d 48 (1999), 98-1534.
782.22 782.23 782.24 782.25 782.26 782.27 782.28 782.29 782.30 782.31 782.32 782.33 782.34 782.35 782.36 782.37 782.38 782.39 782.44 782.45 782.46
Discharge if in custody under process. Prisoner, when bailed. Prisoner, when remanded. Custody of prisoner pending proceedings. Interested person notified. Notice to district attorney. Transfer from circuit court commissioner. Proceedings in absence of prisoner; appearance by attorney. Order of discharge, how enforced, action for damages. Nonliability of officers. Reimprisonment for same cause; when cause not same. Warrant in lieu of writ. Order of arrest. Warrant, how executed. Proceedings for unlawful detention. Penalty for refusing papers. Reimprisoning party discharged. Concealment of person entitled to writ. Prisoner brought for trial or as witness. Witness fees, inmates of state institutions. Habeas corpus not available to prisoners passing through this state.
A question of statutory interpretation may be considered on a writ of habeas corpus only if noncompliance with the statute at issue resulted in the restraint of the petitioner’s liberty in violation of the constitution or the court’s jurisdiction. State ex rel. Hager v. Marten, 226 Wis. 2d 687, 594 N.W.2d 791 (1999), 97-3841. Because it is an extraordinary writ, habeas corpus relief is available only when the petitioner demonstrates: 1) restraint of his or her liberty, 2) the restraint was imposed contrary to constitutional protections or by a body lacking jurisdiction, and 3) no other adequate remedy available at law. A petition for a writ of habeas corpus will not be granted if the petitioner asserts a claim that could have been raised during a prior appeal if the petitioner offers no valid reason to excuse the failure. State v. Pozo, 2002 WI App 279, 258 Wis. 2d 796, 654 N.W.2d 12, 02-0127. A claim for ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel must be filed with the circuit court either as a s. 974.06 motion or as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. A defendant arguing ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, conversely, may not seek relief under s. 974.06 and must instead petition the court of appeals for a writ of habeas corpus. State v. Starks, 2013 WI 69, 349 Wis. 2d 274, 833 N.W.2d 146, 100425.
782.02 Who not entitled to. No person shall be entitled to prosecute such writ who shall have been committed or detained by virtue of the final judgment or order of any competent tribunal of civil or criminal jurisdiction or by virtue of any execution issued upon such order or judgment; but no order of commitment for any alleged contempt or upon proceedings as for contempt to enforce the rights or remedies of any party shall be deemed a judgment or order within the meaning of this section; nor shall any attachment or other process issued upon any such order be deemed an execution within the meaning of this section. History: 1979 c. 32 s. 59; Stats. 1979 s. 782.02.