State v. Jordan

1 Joseph J. Jordan, pro se, seeks relief from a judgment entered on jury verdicts finding him guilty of one count of first-degree reckless homicide, three counts of first-degree recklessly endangering safety, and one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm, see WIS. STAT. §§ 940.02(1), 941.30(1), 941.29(2) (2001-02), and from orders denying his motions for post-conviction relief and for reconsideration. Jordan claims that: (1) the trial court used the wrong standard when it found that he was not competent to represent himself at the trial; (2) he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his trial lawyer did not object when the prosecutor allegedly vouched for police detectives credibility during closing arguments; and (3) the trial court did not ask about an alleged conflict of interest because Jordans trial lawyer was paid by the taxpayers without Jordans knowledge or consent. The trial court addressed these issues in its cogent written decision and order denying Jordans motion for post-conviction relief. It applied the proper legal standards to the relevant facts and reached the correct result. Therefore, we incorporate and attach the trial courts decision, and affirm. See WIS.CT. APP. IOP VI(5)(a) (Oct. 14, 2003) (court of appeals may adopt trial courts opinion).