The attorney general does not have authority to challenge the constitutionality of statutes. Any authority the attorney general has is found in the statutes. The attorney general's constitutional powers and statutory powers are one and the same.
Rule 5.1. Constitutional Challenge to a Statute (a) Notice by a Party. A party that files a pleading, written motion, or other paper drawing into question the constitutionality of a federal or state statute must promptly: (1) file a notice of constitutional question stating the question and identifying the paper that raises it, if:
This rule does not displace any of the statutory or rule procedures that permit dismissal of all or part of an action—including a constitutional challenge—at any time, even before service of process. Changes Made After Publication and Comment. Rule 5.1 as proposed for adoption incorporates several changes from the published draft.
(B) a state statute is questioned and the parties do not include the state, one of its agencies, or one of its officers or employees in an official capacity; and
The court may reject a constitutional challenge at any time, but may not enter a final judgment holding a statute unconstitutional before the time set to intervene expires. The published rule would have required notice and certification when an officer of the United States or a state brings suit in an official capacity.
Unless the court sets a later time, the 60-day period for intervention runs from the time a party files a notice of constitutional question or from the time the court certifies a constitutional challenge, whichever is earlier. Rule 5.1 (a) directs that a party promptly serve the notice of constitutional question. The court may extend the 60-
Constitutional Challenge to a Statute. (a) Notice by a Party. A party that files a pleading, written motion, or other paper drawing into question the constitutionality of a federal or state statute must promptly: (1) file a notice of constitutional question stating the question and identifying the paper that raises it, if: ...
The notice of constitutional question will ensure that the attorney general is notified of constitutional challenges and has an opportunity to exercise the statutory right to intervene at the earliest possible point in the litigation. The court's certification obligation remains, and is the only notice when the constitutionality ...
New Rule 5.1 requires a party that files a pleading, written motion, or other paper drawing in question the constitutionality of a federal or state statute to file a notice of constitutional question and serve it on the United States Attorney General or state attorney general. The party must promptly file and serve the notice of constitutional question. This notice requirement supplements the court's duty to certify a constitutional challenge to the United States Attorney General or state attorney general. The notice of constitutional question will ensure that the attorney general is notified of constitutional challenges and has an opportunity to exercise the statutory right to intervene at the earliest possible point in the litigation. The court's certification obligation remains, and is the only notice when the constitutionality of a federal or state statute is drawn in question by means other than a party's pleading, written motion, or other paper.
The court's certification obligation remains, and is the only notice when the constitutionality of a federal or state statute is drawn in question by means other than a party's pleading, written motion, or other paper. Moving the notice and certification provisions from Rule 24 (c) to a new rule is designed to attract the parties’ attention ...
The language of Rule 5.1 has been amended as part of the general restyling of the Civil Rules to make them more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. These changes are intended to be stylistic only.
The published rule would have required notice and certification when an officer of the United States or a state brings suit in an official capacity. There is no need for notice in such circumstances. The words “is sued” were deleted to correct this oversight.
If no guardian has been appointed when service is made upon a person alleged by the plaintiff to be incompetent to have charge of the person's affairs, then service of the summons shall be made upon the guardian ad litem after appointment under s. 803.01. 801.11(3)(3) State.
Sub. (4) does not require the affiant to have first hand knowledge of how the documents were authenticated, nor does it require that the affiant's statements must be unqualified; it requires that the affiant affirm that an authenticated copy of the summons was served. State v. Boyd, 2000 WI App 208, 238 Wis. 2d 693, 618 N.W.2d 251, 99-2633.
973.20(2)(am)1. 1. Return the property to the owner or owner's designee; or
973.20(1g)(a)(a)“Crime considered at sentencing" means any crime for which the defendant was convicted and any read-in crime.
3. A change in law or procedure related to sentencing or revocation of extended supervision effective after the inmate was sentenced that would have resulted in a shorter term of confinement in prison or , if the inmate was returned to prison upon revocation of extended supervision, a shorter period of confinement in prison upon revocation, if the change had been applicable when the inmate was sentenced.