On Point blog, page 12 of 12
Ch. 51 Recommitment – Instruction on Dangerousness, Sufficiency of Evidence
Oneida County v. Michael B., 2010AP002216-FT, District 3, 2/8/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Michael B.: Lora B. Cerone. SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
Mental Recommitment – Instruction on Dangerousness
The following oral jury instruction didn’t impermissibly direct the jury to find dangerousness, on trial for mental recommitment: “This is a recommitment proceeding, therefore, the law requires that the requirement of a recent act,