On Point blog, page 6 of 34
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.
COA affirms 51 extension order in fact-intensive opinion
Winnebago County v. D.S., 2023AP1484, 1/24/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In a fact-dependent appeal, COA holds that the evidence was sufficient and the trial court’s findings adequate to uphold this 51 extension order.
COA rejects challenges to sufficiency of evidence for 51 extension, involuntary med order
Winnebago County v. T.M.G., 2023AP681, 1/24/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Despite T.M.G.’s challenges, COA affirms this extension and related medication order applying what it believes to be well-settled precedent.
COA rejects challenges to recommitment and involuntary medication
Ozaukee County D.H.S. v. M.A.G., 2023AP681, 11/29/23, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
M.A.G. challenged the extension of her Chapter 51 commitment and the order finding her incompetent to refuse medication. The court of appeals affirms both orders after concluding that the county presented sufficient evidence of dangerousness under the the third standard and sufficient evidence that she is not competent to refuse medication.
COA reverses in another D.J.W. win for failure to make specific factual findings
Winnebago County v. A.P.D., 2023AP863, 12/13/23, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In yet another defense win reliant on Langlade County v. D.J.W., COA holds that the circuit court failed to make adequate findings in this Chapter 51 appeal.
SCOW accepts review of important case which could clarify the “ground rules” for involuntary medication appeals
Winnebago County v. D.E.W., 2023AP215, petition for review of an unpublished court of appeals decision granted 12/11/23; dismissed as improvidently granted 5/14/24, case activity (including briefs)
SCOW accepts a case poised to resolve ongoing conflict in COA with respect to involuntary medication orders in Chapter 51 appeals.
Challenge to involuntary medication order fails
Sawyer County v. P.D.F., 2022AP2007, 11/7/23, District III (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Although P.D.F. successfully persuades COA that the circuit court erroneously concluded he did not understand the advantages, disadvantages and alternatives to medication, the record nonetheless shows that he was incapable of applying an understanding.
COA rejects plain error hearsay challenge in Chapter 51 appeal, ducks constitutional argument
Walworth County v. E.W., 2023AP289, 11/1/23, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Defying the recent trend of hearsay victories in Chapter 51 appeals, COA rejects E.W.’s attempt to argue that the admission of hearsay evidence at his final hearing constituted “plain error.”
Fear of “decompensation” and recurrence of dangerous behavior dooms challenge to recommitment
Sauk County D.H.S. v. R.K.M., 2023AP912, 10/12/23, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
R.K.M. raised a variety of arguments seeking to challenge the often cited “decompensation” theory for extending a chapter 51 commitment where the subject has (1) made substantial progress while under commitment, (2) engaged in no recent dangerous behavior, and (3) is generally compliant with medication and treatment provided under commitment. However, his challenge runs into the buzzsaw of fears of decompensation and “recurrence of his symptoms.” (Op., ¶¶6-7).
Defense win! Absent hearsay, evidence insufficient for ch. 51 extension
Winnebago County v. D.E.S., 2023AP460, 9/20/23, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
This is a nice case to know, both for its careful, thorough analysis of a common ch. 51 problem–commitments based entirely or extensively on hearsay–and its collection of other cases analyzing the same issue. The sole witness at D.E.S. (“Dennis”)’s extension hearing was a Dr. Anderson, who had witnessed none of the behaviors she relied on to conclude that Dennis was dangerous, instead reading them from his institutional records. Over objection, the trial court relied on them anyway. The court of appeals now reverses the commitment because absent the hearsay, there was no evidence tending to show that Dennis would be dangerous if treatment were withdrawn.