On Point: c. 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State v. Frank Curiel, 227 Wis.2d 389, 597 N.W.2d 697 (1999), affirming unpublished decision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,

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.”

State v. Ronald J. Zanelli (II), 223 Wis.2d 545, 589 N.W.2d 687 (Ct. App. 1998)
For Zanelli: Jane K. Smith.

Holding: Second time’s not the charm for Zanelli, who won his 1st appeal, State v. Zanelli (I), 212 Wis. 2d 358, 569 N.W.2d 301 (Ct. App. 1997). On this subsequent appeal, the court holds the evidence  sufficient to establish his pedophilia. The state’s expert witnesses testified that Zanelli suffers from pedophilia,