On Point blog, page 2 of 8
COA affirms order authorizing involuntary medication under ch. 51 where, contrary to the evidence, appellant denies mental illness.
Dane County v. M.A.A., 2024AP1589, 12/27/24, District IV (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court’s order authorizing involuntarily administering medication to M.A.A. in light of evidence that M.A.A. denies he has a mental illness.
In HUGE defense win, COA emphasizes that obtaining an involuntary med order is no walk in the park for the State
State v. J.D.B., 2023AP715-CR, 9/10/24, District I (recommended for publication); petition for review granted, 2/12/25 case activity
In a recommended-for-publication decision, COA wholly endorses all of J.D.B.’s arguments requiring a high burden of proof when the State seeks an involuntary medication order in order to render a defendant competent to stand trial. Along the way, COA offers a bevy of helpful holdings that are also applicable outside of this highly-specialized practiced area.
COA rejects challenges to 51 commitment, involuntary medication orders
Brown County v. L.M.R., 2023AP2314, District III, 8/6/24 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
COA rejects all of L.M.R.’s challenges raising commonly-litigated appellate issues and affirms in this Chapter 51 case given some less-than favorable facts.
HUGE Defense Win: SCOW overrules S.L.L. and reverses default judgment in Chapter 51 appeal
Waukesha County v. M.A.C., 2024 WI 30, 7/5/24, reversing an unpublished court of appeals decision; case activity (including briefs)
In a big defense win, 6 justices agree that M.A.C. is entitled to relief, with four justices joining together to dismantle SCOW’s prior decision in S.L.L. with respect to notice and default judgment in Chapter 51 proceedings.
SCOW accepts review of yet another Chapter 51 appeal
Douglas County v. K.A.D., 2023AP1072, petition for review of an unpublished court of appeals decision granted 6/17/24; case activity (including briefs)
In an interesting grant, SCOW agrees to review this freestanding appeal of an expired medication order.
Despite serious criticisms of doctor’s testimony, COA affirms 51 extension and involuntary med orders given contents of report
Brown County v. R.J.M., 2024AP206, 5/7/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Despite the doctor’s imprecise and generic testimony, COA holds that admission of his report resolves any deficiencies in the record and affirms.
Court rejects usual attacks to 51 extension, medication order and affirms
Racine County v. C.B., 2023AP2018-FT, 3/20/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In a factually-specific appeal of a recommitment order, COA rejects all of C.B.’s arguments and affirms.
COA rejects challenges to finding of dangerousness, incompetency to refuse medication and upholds trial court’s decision to admit expert’s report at 51 hearing
Winnebago County v. C.J.H., 2023AP1263, 3/6/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In a 51 appeal presenting several commonly litigated issues, COA finds no error and affirms.
COA rejects D.J.W. claim on barest of findings; continues handwringing about influx of Ch. 51 appeals
Winnebago County v. B.R.C., 2023AP1842, 2/14/24, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In quite the head-scratcher, the court of appeals rejects a D.J.W. “specific factual findings” claim while acknowledging that such claims “are multiplying and it is clear that all sides could benefit from clarity on the point.” (Emphasis added). The court then proceeds to offer a step-by-step guide guide for circuit courts to make D.J.W. findings that will be “less likely to be overturned on appeal.” While the circuit court’s findings at issue don’t come close to any such model of clarity, the court holds that they were “sufficient” to allow the court conduct a “meaningful review of the trial court’s exercise of discretion and the evidence presented at the hearing.” Op., ¶21.
COA affirms expired Ch. 51 order for involuntary medication
Douglas County v. K.A.D., 2023AP1072, 2/13/24, District 3 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); petition for review granted 6/17/24 case activity
K.A.D. (“Kyle”) challenged the order authorizing his involuntary medication and treatment on two grounds: (1) that the county failed to establish that he was provided the required explanation regarding the recommended medication and treatment and (2) that the county failed to prove he is incompetent to refuse medication and treatment. While the court of appeals assumes without deciding that Kyle’s appeal is moot, the court concludes that Kyle’s case meets an exception to the mootness doctrine, and thereafter rejects Kyle’s argument on the merits.