On Point blog, page 2 of 3
SVP – Sufficiency of Evidence – Actuarial Instruments
State v. Steven J. Burgess, 2003 WI 71, affirming 2002 WI App 264, 258 Wis. 2d 548, 654 N.W.2d 81
For Burgess: Steven P. Weiss, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding:
¶25. Burgess challenges his commitment based on the use of actuarial instruments in his chapter 980 commitment proceeding because they did not take into account his mental health. Consequently, Burgess contends that the instruments are irrelevant for chapter 980 proceedings because there must be a nexus between an offender’s mental disorder and the probability of committing sexually violent acts in the future.
SVP – Sufficiency of Evidence – Difficulty Controlling Behavior
State v. Steven J. Burgess, 2003 WI 71, affirming 2002 WI App 264, 258 Wis. 2d 548, 654 N.W.2d 81
For Burgess: Steven P. Weiss, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether the evidence was sufficient, where the state’s expert conceded that respondent could conform his conduct to requirements of the law.
Holding:
¶29. Nevertheless, Burgess claims that the expert testimony presented at trial,
SVP – Sufficiency of Evidence – Different Expert Opinions
State v. Joseph A. Lombard, 2003 WI App 163, affirmed, other grounds, 2004 WI 95
For Lombard: David R. Karpe
Issue/Holding: Evidence sufficient to support commitment though only one state’s expert supported commitment against three defense experts:
¶21 … The State’s expert, a psychologist who evaluated Lombard for the purpose of determining whether proceedings under Wis. Stat. ch. 980 should be instituted,
SVP – Sufficiency of Evidence – Actuarial Data
State v. James Lalor, 2003 WI App 68, PFR filed 4/15/03
For Lalor: T. Christopher Kelly
Issue/Holding: Evidence based on actuarial instruments (RRASOR; PCL-R; MnSOST-R; V-RAG), to the effect that of people with similar scores about 50% reoffend within five years and 70% within ten years, supports finding of substantial likelihood to engage in sexual violence. ¶¶15-25.
SVP – Habeas Challenge to Commitment – Venue
State ex rel Edwin C. West v. Bartow, 2002 WI App 42
For West: Leonard D. Kachinsky
Issue: Whether the court had discretion to order change of venue from Winnebago (county of current SVP confinement) to Milwaukee (county of commitment), on habeas challenge to the commitment.
Holding: Venue was proper in Winnebago under § 801.50(4)(b) (where petitioner is being restrained); the trial court’s transfer mistakenly relied on § 801.50(4)(a) (where petitioner was convicted or sentenced,
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 – Sufficiency of Evidence – Volitional Capacity
State v. Kenneth Parrish, 2002 WI App 263, PFR filed 11/11/02
For Parrish: Charles B. Vetzner, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding: Although evidence of volitional impairment is required and in this bench trial the trial court erred in commenting to the contrary, ¶35, the court in fact found the existence of such evidence, ¶36.
SVP – Appeal – Waiver of Issue of Prosecutor’s Authority
State v. Frederick L. Pharm, 2000 WI App 167, 238 Wis. 2d 97, 617 N.W.2d 163
For Pharm: Jack E. Schairer
Issue: Whether Pharm waived objection to the prosecutor’s authorization to file a Ch. 980 petition.
Holding: Pharm’s failure to object to the prosecutor’s filing the petition without going through the Department of Justice under §§ 990.015 and 980.02(1) waived the issue, ¶9.
SVP – Appeal – Standard of Review, Sufficiency of Evidence
State v. Frank Curiel, 227 Wis.2d 389, 597 N.W.2d 697 (1999), affirming unpublished decision
For Curiel: Jack. C. Hoag, Sedor & Hoag
Holding: “¶6. …. We hold that appellate court review of challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence in ch. 980 proceedings should be that standard applied in criminal cases.” Curiel argues that the standard should be a mixed question of law and fact. The court holds that,
SVP – Sufficiency of evidence
State v. Paul Matek, 223 Wis.2d 611, 589 N.W.2d 441 (Ct. App. 1998)
For Matek: Russell Bohach
Holding: Evidence to support ch. 980 SVP verdict sustained: the diagnosis took into account Matek’s refusal to participate in treatment, and therefore the verdict “was not based solely on his prior bad acts.”