On Point blog, page 50 of 60
NGI Procedure – Abandonment of NGI Plea and Necessity of Personal Colloquy
State v. Jennifer F. Francis, 2005 WI App 161
For Francis: Hans P. Koesser
Issue: Whether the trial court must engage the defendant in a personal colloquy before allowing an NGI plea, § 971.06(1)(d), to be abandoned.
Holding: Because an NGI plea is not a constitutional or otherwise fundamental right, a personal colloquy with the defendant isn’t a precondition to withdrawal of the plea, ¶¶15-22.
SVP: Dangerousness, Reduced Showing — Effective Date
State v. Shermell G. Tabor, / State v. Ronald Irvin Ryan, 2005 WI App 107
For Tabor / Ryan: Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate
Issue/Holding: Legislative modification of the definition of SVP “dangerousness” (2003 Wis Act 187, §§ 2, 2m, amending §§ 980.01(7) and 980.02(2)(c); reducing the necessary showing from “substantial probability” to mere likelihood of sexual violence) has an effective date of April 22,
SVP – Post-Disposition – Discharge Procedure – Probable Cause Determination, Insufficient Showing on Particular Facts
State v. Robert M. Fowler, 2005 WI App 41, PFR filed 3/9/05For Fowler: Randall E. Paulson, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate
Issue/Holding:
¶30 Dr. Harasymiw’s report concludes that Fowler still is a sexually violent person. This was sufficient to support the trial court’s conclusion that it was substantially probable that Fowler would engage in acts of sexual violence. …¶31 … Although Dr. Maskel disagreed with certain conclusions,
SVP – Qualifying Placement, § 980.02(2)(ag) – Secure Facility, Juvenile Adjudication
State v. Tremaine Y., 2005 WI App 56, PFR filed 3/4/05
For Tremaine: Robert W. Peterson, Samantha Jeanne Humes, SPD, Milwaukee TrialI
Issue: Whether a ch. 980 petition is supported against a juvenile who was not placed in a secured correctional facility following the original adjudication on the qualifying sexually violent offense but was subsequently placed in such a facility as a result of additional offense.
SVP – Disposition: Supervised Release – Revocation – Sufficiency of Evidence
State v. Ervin Burris, 2004 WI 91, affirming 2002 WI App 262, 258 Wis. 2d. 454, 654 N.W.2d 866
For Burris: Joseph L. Sommers
Issue/Holding:
¶73. Judge Welker found that Burris disregarded the rules of his supervised release in order to satisfy his compulsive urges. Burris consumed alcohol, a drug that lowers inhibitions. He abused the privileges provided to him in order to meet a married woman and have sex with her,
SVP – Postdisposition: Supervised Release – Hearing – Expert’s Report
State v. Richard A. Brown III, 2004 WI App 33, reversed on other grounds, 2005 WI 29
For Brown: Steven P. Weiss, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether, at a § 980.08 supervised release hearing, an expert’s report filed under § 980.08(3) may be introduced into evidence, though hearsay and though the author does not testify.
Holding:
¶14. …. Generally, where a party secures the services of a psychologist or other professional in support of an action,
SVP – Trial: Evidence – Misconduct, § 904.04(2)
State v. Gregory J. Franklin, 2004 WI 38, affirming unpublished decision of court of appeals
For Franklin: Patrick M. Donnelly, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding:
¶16. In order to be admissible in a ch. 980 proceeding, all evidence must be relevant and that relevance must not be outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. Wis. Stat. § 904.01; Wis. Stat. § 904.03;
SVP – Postdisposition: Supervised Release – Procedure – Appointment of Expert for Subject, §§ 980.08(3)-(4)
State v. Dennis Thiel, 2004 WI App 225
For Thiel: Suzanne L. Hagopian, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue1: Whether the court must appoint an examiner for the subject under § 980.08(3) when it has already appointed one under § 980.08(4).
Holding:
¶17. The parties agree that the language of Wis. Stat. § 980.08(3) requires the circuit court to appoint an examiner for the court, and we concur.
Serial Litigation Bar (Escalona-Naranjo): Applicable to SVP Commitments
State v. Thomas H. Bush (II), 2004 WI App 193, reversed in part, 2005 WI 103
For Bush: Robert G. LeBell
Issue: Whether Bush, on appeal from denial of petition for release from SVP commitment, § 980.09(2), is procedurally barred from challenging the constitutionality of his underlying commitment because he could have raised such challenge in a prior appeal.
Holding:
¶13.
Ch. 880 Guardianship Proceeding: Authority to Order Support In
Amy Z. v. Jon T., 2004 WI App 73
For Jon T.: Geoffrey Dowse
Issue/Holding:
¶18. We conclude that the circuit court had the authority to order child support in the context of the Wis. Stat. ch. 880 proceeding. We do so in light of the constitutional grant of broad plenary power to the circuit courts coupled with the petition requirements under Wis. Stat. § 880.07,