WAUKESHA, Wis. — Darrell Brooks, the man sentenced to six life sentences and more than 700 additional years in prison for killing six and injuring more than 60 people in the Waukesha Christmas parade, is appealing his conviction.
Brooks filed his notice of intent to seek post-conviction relief in Waukesha on Tuesday.
In the handwritten filing, Brooks wrote it is “not [his] intention to bring any controversy before the court, but it is my intention to have this post-conviction relief matter reviewed and heard as quickly as possible as there are clear issues of the law and the legal facts in this matter.”
Despite firing his public defense attorneys just days before his trial began in October, Brooks is requesting the public defender’s office to represent him for his appeal.
On Monday, Judge Jennifer Dorow denied a motion from Brooks to stay his conviction pending his appeal, which would have kept him in the Waukesha County Courthouse and not the Dodge Correctional Institute.
In October, Spectrum News 1 spoke with criminal defense attorney Julius Kim of Kim & LaVoy, S.C. Kim said having a conviction overturned is never easy.
“Winning a criminal case on appeal is very difficult to do in the first instance,” Kim said. “I always tell our clients that, ‘Listen, we need to win this case on the trial level. Getting convicted and trying to win that case on appeal is always an uphill battle.”’
Kim also said Brooks most likely would have an appeals court look at the decision to not change the venue for the trial. Brooks had asked the trial to be moved out of Waukesha.
Kim said an appeals court could also look at the decision deeming Brooks competent to defend himself. Brooks wouldn’t be able to appeal for the ineffectiveness of counsel since he defended himself, or his sovereign citizen claims, Kim said.
Kim also said he doesn’t think Brooks has any grounds for appeal for being kicked out to the side courtroom because of the case law Illinois v. Allen.
“You heard Dorow say how him being in the other courtroom served as the functional equivalent of being in the actual courtroom, because of the technology that was used,” Kim said. “I think a court of appeals would agree with that. I think they even turned cameras that weren’t available to the public to the jury, so he could see them during the trial.”