On Point blog, page 7 of 15
Evidence sufficient to prove elements of ch. 51 commitment
Outagamie County v. D.G.M., 2020AP967, District 3, 9/21/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The evidence at the final hearing on the petition to commit D.G.M. under ch. 51 was sufficient to establish all the statutory elements and D.G.M.’s incompetence to refuse medication.
Defense win: Circuit court failed to make dangerousness findings at ch. 51 commitment hearing
Shawano County v. S.L.V., 2021AP223, District 3, 8/17/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Langlade County v. D.J.W., 2020 WI 41, 391 Wis. 2d 231, 942 N.W.2d 277, requires a circuit court to make specific fact findings about dangerousness at a ch. 51 commitment hearing. The circuit court didn’t do that in this case, so the commitment order is reversed.
Evidence showed ch. 51 respondent was “a proper subject for treatment”
Winnebago County v. J.C.S., 2021AP354, District 2, 8/4/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The evidence presented at J.C.S.’s final commitment hearing was “just enough” to prove J.C.S. was a proper subject of treatment, one of the elements necessary to justify a ch. 51 commitment order, § 51.20(1)(a)1.
Ch. 51 jury demand must be made before originally scheduled final hearing, not adjourned final hearing
Waukesha County v. M.J.S., 20221AP105-FT, District 2, 7/28/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Under § 51.20(11)(a), a demand for a jury trial must be made “48 hours in advance of the time set for final hearing,” if notice of final hearing was provided to the subject individual or his or her lawyer. Applying Marathon County v. R.J.O., 2020 WI App 20, 392 Wis. 2d 157, 943 N.W.2d 898, the “time set for final hearing” is the original hearing date, not the date set after an adjournment.
Ch. 51 respondent had sufficient notice of standard of dangerousness; and the evidence was sufficient to dangerousness
Trempealeau County v. B.K., 2020AP1166, District 3, 7/27/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
B.K. (“Brian”) argues he was denied procedural due process because he was not given particularized notice of which standard of dangerousness the County intended to prove at the final commitment hearing. He also contends the evidence presented at the hearing was insufficient to prove he was dangerous. The court of appeals rejects with both claims.
Evidence presented at commitment hearing sufficient to prove dangerousness
Outagamie County DHHS v. M.D.H., 2020AP86, District 3, 7/13/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The evidence at M.D.H.’s final commitment hearing proved he was dangerous under § 51.20(1)(a)2.d.
Evidence sufficient to support ch. 51 dangerousness finding
Marathon County v. T.A.T., 2019AP1709, District 3, 6/29/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The testimony of the the three witnesses called by the County provided sufficient evidence to support the court’s finding that T.A.T. (“Travis”) was dangerous under § 51.20(1)(a)2.a.
COA reverses ch. 51 recommitment of person under ch. 55 protective placement
Outagamie County v. X.Z.B., 2020AP2058, 6/22/2121, District 3, (1 judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
This case involves the recommitment of a protectively placed person based on §51.20(1)(a)2.c., the 3rd standard of dangerousness. The court of appeals reversed the circuit courts’ recommitment order for insufficient evidence. And, for the second time in one week, it held that when circuit courts fail to make the requisite factual findings for a commitment that has expired, the remedy is reversal not remand for further fact-finding.
SCOW dismisses appeal regarding 48-hour deadline for filing ch. 51 examiners’ reports
Last fall, SCOW granted review on the question of whether a doctor’s failure to file an examiner’s report 48 hours before a commitment hearing deprived the circuit court of competence to adjudicate the case. See our post on Fond du Lac County v. S.N.W., Appeal No. 2019AP2073. This is a recurring problem, so Chapter 51 lawyers eagerly awaited the answer. Unfortunately, after briefing and oral argument, SCOW has dismissed yet another Chapter 51 case without a decision.
Part I: COA affirms ch. 51 initial commitment and med order in violation of precedent
Rock County v. J.J.K., 2020AP1085, 4/29/21, District 4, (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication), case activity
This is an appeal from the initial commitment and involuntary medication order entered against J.J.K. The court of appeals affirmed both contrary to published precedent on the rule against hearsay, the plain error doctrine, and procedural and substantive due process.