PER CURIAM. On March 5, 2008, the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) filed a complaint alleging Attorney Terrence J. Woods committed six counts of professional misconduct in connection with representing a client in a personal injury lawsuit and for failure to file and/or pay certain state income taxes. The parties executed a joint stipulation, so we consider the OLR complaint and the parties' stipulation without the appointment of a referee pursuant to SCR 22.12(1). After careful consideration, we adopt the stipulation of the parties and agree that the seriousness of Attorney Woods' misconduct warrants the suspension of his license to practice law in Wisconsin for a period of one year to run consecutive to his current suspension imposed by this court in July 2008. We further agree that Attorney Woods should pay the costs of this proceeding.

ANN WALSH BRADLEY, J. The petitioner, Jeffrey A. Warbelton, seeks review of a published court of appeals decision affirming his conviction for stalking. Under Wis. Stat. § 940.32(2m)(a) (2001-02), whoever commits the crime of stalking is guilty of a Class H felony if the actor has a previous conviction for a violent crime. Warbelton stipulated that he had been convicted of a prior violent crime. Over his objection, the stipulation was admitted into evidence and the issue was submitted to the jury for its determination.

PATIENCE DRAKE ROGGENSACK, J. We review a decision of the court of appeals affirming the circuit court's decision, which affirmed the Labor and Industry Review Commission's (LIRC) order directing that Gloria Graham (Graham) is eligible to receive a statutory award for permanent disfigurement under Wisconsin worker's compensation law, Wis. Stat. § 102.56(1) (2005-06) even though she suffered no visible burns, scars or amputations. In affirming LIRC's interpretation of § 102.56(1) and the corresponding award of compensation to Graham, the circuit court held that LIRC was entitled to great weight deference, while the court of appeals held that due weight deference was appropriate.

N. PATRICK CROOKS, J. Petitioners Nelly De La Trinidad, Victor Leonardo Aguilar-Hernandez, and Luz Maria Torres-Sanches (collectively, De La Trinidad) are the parents of two children who drowned in a pond on the grounds of Halter Wildlife, Inc. De La Trinidad seeks review of an unpublished court of appeals opinion affirming a circuit court order that dismissed their lawsuit against Halter Wildlife, Inc. (Halter); its insurer, Capitol Indemnity Corporation; and lifeguard Rachel Proko, an employee of Halter, on the grounds that the recreational immunity statute applies and bars a suit under these circumstances.

CURLEY, P.J. MK Investments, LLC and Makbul Sajan (collectively referred to as MK Investments) appeal following a judgment entered in favor of the City of Milwaukee (the City). MK Investments argues that the trial court erred when it dismissed its counterclaim against the City.

PER CURIAM. Ronald W. Morters appeals from that portion of the order of the circuit court that denied his motion to set aside a judgment for frivolous costs in the amount of $10,000. He argues that the circuit court erred when it refused to vacate the judgment under WIS. STAT. § 806.07 (2005-06). Because we conclude that the circuit court properly concluded that Morters was not entitled to have the judgment set aside, we affirm.

PER CURIAM. Bruce Huml appeals a judgment of conviction for theft by virtue of business, contrary to WIS. STAT. § 943.20(1)(b). Huml argues there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. We affirm.

PER CURIAM. Ancelmo Ponce-Sanchez appeals a judgment convicting him of possessing more than forty grams of cocaine with intent to deliver as a party to a crime and maintaining a drug trafficking place. He also appeals an order denying his postconviction motion. Ponce-Sanchez contends the State failed to prove he had knowledge of the drugs and drug activities or had dominion and control over the drugs. Therefore, he contends the guilty verdicts are based entirely on his status as the lessee of the premises. Based on that contention, he argues the charges are multiplicitous and the jury was improperly instructed. Because we reject the underlying premise that the convictions were based solely on Ponce-Sanchez's status as lessee and the remaining issues were not properly preserved, we affirm the judgment and order.

PER CURIAM. Marlon O. Evans appeals from an order summarily denying his third postconviction motion. The issue is whether recent affidavits constitute newly-discovered evidence, and thus, a sufficient reason to overcome the procedural bar of State v. Escalona-Naranjo, 185 Wis. 2d 168, 185-86, 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994). We conclude that they do not because we have previously considered the significance of that same evidence directly in the context of ineffective assistance of counsel; re-litigating that same evidence now proffered indirectly by "new" witnesses is not a sufficient reason to overcome Escalona's procedural bar. Therefore, we affirm.

Counsel for Terry Lee Pugh has filed a no-merit report pursuant to WIS. STAT. RULE 809.32 (2005-06).(1) Pugh has not responded to the report. Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we conclude that there are no issues of arguable merit that Pugh could raise in postconviction proceedings. We therefore summarily affirm Pugh's conviction.

KESSLER, J. Landray M. Harris appeals from a judgment of conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to deliver, as a party to a crime, contrary to WIS. STAT. §§ 961.41(1m)(cm)2. and 939.05 (2005-06), and from an order denying his motion for resentencing or sentence modification. Harris seeks resentencing on grounds that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion when it made several comments at sentencing that suggest the court improperly relied on race and gender stereotypes. We conclude that Harris is entitled to resentencing because although the trial court properly considered all appropriate relevant factors, it nonetheless erroneously exercised its discretion when it made comments at sentencing that suggested to a reasonable person in the position of the defendant or a reasonable observer that it was improperly considering the defendant's race in imposing sentence. Therefore, we reverse and remand for resentencing.

PER CURIAM. This appeal arises from the latest in a series of motions filed by Ontario Antwan Davis following his 1997 criminal convictions. By decision and order dated December 10, 2007, the circuit court denied both Davis's motion for relief from an allegedly void sentence and his motion for relief from postconviction orders entered in 2006. We affirm.

CURLEY, P.J. Patricia and Thomas Recely appeal the judgment and order denying their postjudgment motions following a bench trial in their suit for damages emanating out of a traffic accident. Recely submits that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion by refusing to permit one of his key expert witnesses to testify concerning the cause of his injury and by refusing to allow Recely's attorney the opportunity to make an offer of proof concerning the expert witness's testimony. Additionally, Recely argues that the trial court erred in reducing his award for pain and suffering after finding that Recely did not mitigate his damages because he smoked shortly after his fusion surgery. As a result, Recely seeks a new trial.

CURLEY, P.J. Quad Graphics, Inc., Milwaukee Magazine, and Kurt Chandler (unless otherwise specified, collectively referred to as Quad), appeal from an order denying their motion for judgment on the pleadings. Quad filed a petition for leave to appeal the order, which we granted.

FINE, J. Norman R. Torres appeals a judgment dismissing his complaint against his former employer, Roundy's Supermarkets, Inc., also known as Pick 'N Save, and a former co-employee, Brian Marks. Torres claims that the circuit court erred when it: (1) dismissed his claims, either as barred by the Wisconsin Worker's Compensation Act, see WIS. STAT. § 102.03(2), or because they did not state a claim; and (2) precluded him from amending his complaint. We affirm.

PER CURIAM. Kurt Schneider and Erica Bleskacek appeal an order granting Kris and Maxine Kunsman grandparental visitation with Bleskacek's two children. Schneider and Bleskacek contend seven circuit court errors entitle them to relief. We disagree and affirm. Additionally, we sanction Schneider and Bleskacek's counsel due to repeated citation of unpublished opinions.

PER CURIAM. This is Attorney Christopher S. Carson's second appeal of costs and attorney fees arising out of an underlying divorce action. He appeals the amount awarded on remand after his first appeal. We decline to find this appeal frivolous, but affirm the order and order Carson to desist from filing any further appeals in this matter until he has paid all outstanding amounts in full.

PER CURIAM. Anita A. appeals an order denying her petition for specific periods of physical placement with her granddaughter. Anita has not overcome the presumption that a fit parent's decision regarding grandparent visitation is in the best interest of the child. We affirm.

PER CURIAM. Dale and Doreen Skrzypchak appeal a judgment dismissing their claim against Dr. Paul Jensen in a medical malpractice action after a jury found Jensen was not negligent in treating Dale Skrzypchak. The Skrzypchaks seek a new trial, raising multiple claims of circuit court error. They also ask that we exercise our discretionary power of reversal.

ANDERSON, P.J. Jon L. Keppen appeals from the denial of his motion to suppress evidence challenging the reasonable suspicion supporting an investigative traffic stop that turned into his being charged with his third offense operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated. We affirm because we conclude that under the totality of the circumstances, a reasonable police officer would suspect that Keppen was operating under the influence of an intoxicant.