On Point blog, page 16 of 60
SCOW issues defense win on Chapter 51 jury demands
Waukesha County v. E.J.W., 2021 WI 85, 11/23/21, reversing an unpublished court of appeals’ opinion; case activity
This 4-3 “defense win” delivers a 1-2-3 punch! The decision: (1) holds that a person undergoing commitment has the right to demand a jury 48 hours before the time set for his final hearing–even if the hearing is rescheduled; (2) reverses a recent, published court of appeals opinion to the contrary; and (3) resolves a split over the proper remedy for cases where the appellate court holds that the circuit court erred, but the underlying commitment order has expired. (Answer: Simply reverse because the circuit court lacks competency to conduct remand proceedings on an expired commitment order.)
Are appeals from expired involuntary med orders ever moot?
Milwaukee County v. R.T.H., 2019AP1763, 10/12/21, District 1 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
This decision raises an important question of first impression: Are appeals from expired involuntary medication orders ever moot? The court of appeals holds that once the involuntary med order expires, it doesn’t have to address the merits of a claim that there was insufficient evidence to support the order. We think the court of appeals is wrong. Let’s hope that “Robert” files a petition for review.
Another Ch. 51 recommitment reversed due to a circuit court’s violation of D.J.W.
Milwaukee County v. D.C.B., 2021AP581, 10/12/21, Distract 1 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
Before a circuit court enters an order to recommit a person under Chapter 51, it is supposed to make specific factual findings with reference to the applicable standard of dangerousness in Wis. Stat. §51.20(1)(a)2. Langlade County v. D.J.W., 2020 WI 41, 391 Wis. 2d 231, 942 N.W.2d 277. The court of appeals reversed the recommitment order in this case because the circuit court violated this rule.
A new Jury Instruction for Ch. 51 recommitment proceedings.
FYI, the Civil Jury Instruction Committee has revised JI 7050 to take account of DJW and other recent cases. Of note, there is now a new instruction, JI 7050A, for recommitment proceedings. They are available in both Word and PDF formats at the State Law Library’s jury instruction site; more specifically, 7050 is here and 7050A is here.
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.
SCOW will decide the remedy for circuit court’s failure to make specific dangerousness findings in ch. 51 cases
Sheboygan County v. M.W., 2021AP6, petition for review of an unpublished court of appeals decision granted 9/14/21; case activity
Issue Presented (composed by On Point)
What is the proper remedy when, in a ch. 51 recommitment proceeding, the circuit court fails to make specific factual findings with reference to the statutory basis for its determination of dangerousness as required by Langlade County v. D.J.W., 2020 WI 41, 391 Wis. 2d 231, 942 N.W.2d 277?
Another ch. 51 win due to failure to comply with D.J.W.
Outagamie County v. J.J.H., 2021AP244, District 3, 9/14/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Though J.J.H.’s primary challenge to the extension of his ch. 51 commitment is about the insufficiency of the evidence to prove dangerousness, the court of appeals (aided by the County’s concession) holds that the circuit court failed to make specific factual findings with reference to the statutory basis for its determination of dangerousness, as required by Langlade County v. D.J.W., 2020 WI 41, 391 Wis. 2d 231, 942 N.W.2d 277.
Defense win: circuit court failed to make sufficient findings regarding dangerousness in ch. 51 case
Outagamie County v. L.C.E., 2021AP324, District 3, 9/8/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Once again, a circuit court fails to make the findings necessary to support the extension of a commitment under § 51.20, resulting in the reversal of the extension order.
Evidence supported extension and involuntary medication orders
Waukesha County v. E.A.B., Jr., 2021AP986-FT, District 2, 9/8/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
E.A.B. was first committed in 2008. At what would appear to be the 12th extension hearing, in 2020, it was extended again. E.A.B.’s challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence for that extension, and for the associated medication order, are rejected by the court of appeals.
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.