Defendant was arrested, charged, and after a jury trial, was convicted of a violation of sec. 940.23, Stats. to wit, causing great bodily harm to another human being by conduct imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind, regardless of human life. He was represented by counsel throughout the proceedings in the trial court, and has been represented on this review by court-appointed Attorney Albert J. Cirilli.
WILKIE, J.
Within one year after defendant's conviction defense counsel failed to present a motion to the trial court to have a new trial or to have the verdict set aside because of the alleged insufficiency of the evidence to support that verdict. We have held that failure to make such a motion at the trial court level bars the plaintiff in error from raising the question of the sufficient credible evidence produced at the trial in support of the verdict unless compelling circumstances exist which permit the question to be raised. There are no compelling circumstances in this case that warrant an exception to this rule.
State v. Van Beek (1966), 31 Wis.2d 51, 141 N.W.2d 873; State v. Thompson (1966), 31 Wis.2d 365, 142 N.W.2d 779.
By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.