On Point blog, page 12 of 12
Ch. 51 Recommitment – “if treatment were withdrawn” test explained and met here
Waukesha County v. Kathleen R. H., 2010AP2571-FT, District 2, 2/23/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Kathleen R.H.: Paul G. LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
The evidence supported ch. 51 mental health recommitment for a period of 12 months.
¶8 Here, Kathleen misconstrues WIS. STAT. § 51.20(1)(am) as requiring proof, apart from that contained in her treatment record, that she would be a danger to herself or others if treatment were withdrawn.
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court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Michael B.: Lora B. Cerone.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,