On Point blog, page 57 of 60
SVP Commitments: Counsel – Effective Assistance, Appeal
State ex rel. Ruven Seibert v. Macht, 2001 WI 67, 244 Wis. 2d 378, 627 N.W.2d 881, reconsideration denied2002 WI 12, reversing unpublished court of appeals order
For Seibert: Gregory P. Seibold; amicus brief: Howard B. Eisenberg, Dean, Marquette Law School
Issue/Holding:
¶1. This case presents two issues. The first issue is whether an indigent sexually violent person, as defined by Wis.
SVP – Trial: Expert Witnesses – Psychologist: Licensure
State v. Larry J. Sprosty, 2001 WI App 231, PFR filed
For Sprosty: Jack E. Schairer, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether a psychologist must be licensed in Wisconsin to provide expert opinion in a Ch. 980 proceeding.
Holding: No: “the standard for determining the admissibility of expert testimony in this case is the general one, namely, whether it will be helpful to the trier of fact, so long as the expert is qualified by knowledge,
SVP – Postdisposition: Supervised Release – Revocation – Uncharged Rule Violation – Right to Notice
State v. Keith Alan VanBronkhorst, 2001 WI App 190
For VanBronkhorst: Jack E. Schairer, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether revocation of supervised release from a ch. 980 commitment was properly based on an uncharged rule violation.
Holding:
¶9 … “(P)rocedural due process protections afforded in probation or parole revocation proceedings apply to supervised release revocation proceedings under ch. 980. “…¶15. Notice to comply with due process requirements must be given sufficiently in advance of scheduled court proceedings so that a defendant will have a reasonable opportunity to prepare.
SVP – Postdisposition – Right to independent expert
State v. Glenn Allen Thayer, 2001 WI App 51, 241 Wis. 2d 417, 626 N.W.2d 811
For Thayer: Jane K. Smith
Issue: Whether the commitment subject has a right to present an independent medical report at a petition for discharge probable cause hearing, § 980.09(2)(a).
Holding: Although a Ch. 980 patient does have the right submit an independent medical report to the court, ¶¶6-13, Wis Stat..
SVP – Trial – Necessity of Objection to Insufficient Proof
State v. Dennis R. Thiel (I), 2000 WI 67, 235 Wis. 2d 823, 612 N.W.2d 94, on certification from court of appeals
For Thiel: John D. Lubarsky, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether the ch. 980 respondent waived his objection to insufficient proof by absence of objection.
Holding: “(T)he subject of a commitment petition under ch. 980 is not required to voice an objection to the allegations contained in the petition….
SVP Commitments: Conditions of Confinement: Involuntary Medication
State v. Anthony D.B., 2000 WI 94, ¶11, 237 Wis. 2d 1, 614 N.W.2d 435
For Anthony D.B.: Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate
Issue: Whether a circuit court has authority, on a Ch. 980 commitment, to order involuntary medication.
Holding: “Because those individuals committed under ch. 980 are defined as ‘patients’ in Wis. Stat. § 51.61(1), we hold that the statutory provision in § 51.61(1)(g),
NGI Plea Precluded by Late Timing
State v. James H. Oswald, 2000 WI App 3, 232 Wis.2d 103, 606 N.W.2d 238
For Oswald: James L. Fullin, Jr., SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether the trial court improperly precluded Oswald from raising an NGI plea.
Holding:
¶ 49. The decision whether to grant a defendant’s motion to change his or her plea from “not guilty” to “not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect”
SVP: Discovery Violation — Waiver
State v. Eric Pletz, 2000 WI App 221, 239 Wis.2d 49, 619 N.W.2d 97
For Pletz: Michael J. Backes
Issue: Whether the state’s pretrial failure to disclose that its witness used the RRASOR screening instrument to evaluate Pletz violated his discovery rights.
Holding: Pletz waived any discovery objection by not promptly objecting, given that he was provided this information before the witness testified. ¶26. Moreover,
SVP Commitments: Post-Disposition – Discipline: Living Unit Reassignment
Edwin C. West v. Macht, 2000 WI App 134, 237 Wis. 2d 265, 614 N.W.2d 34
Issue: Whether living unit reassignment of a Ch. 980 subject was made in retaliation for his exercise of his constitutional right to petition on grievances.
Holding: A commitment subject has a protected interest against being punished for exercising first amendment rights, ¶15; however, those rights may be validly restricted if “reasonably related to legitimate therapeutic and institutional interests.”
SVP – Trial: Evidence – Hearsay: Letters from DSM-IV Committee
State v. Eric Pletz, 2000 WI App 221, 239 Wis.2d 49, 619 N.W.2d 97
For Pletz: Michael J. Backes
Issue: Whether letters from DSM-IV committee members, regarding the impact of an assault on a diagnosis of pedophilia, were properly admitted.
Holding: A basis for an expert opinion, otherwise hearsay, is admissible if of “a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field…. The letters relied on here,