On Point blog, page 1 of 1
SCOW establishes how to appeal “involuntary treatment to competency” orders; orders lower courts to automatically stay involuntary med orders
State v. Andre L. Scott, 2018 WI 74, 6/20/18, reversing a circuit court order on bypass, case activity (including briefs).
Ruling 7-0 for the defendant, SCOW reversed a circuit court order requiring involuntary treatment to competency for postconviction proceedings because the circuit court failed to follow State v. Debra A.E., 188 Wis. 2d 111, 523 N.W.2d 727 (1994). It also established a process for appealing an order finding a defendant incompetent and requiring involuntary treatment to competency. And–very importantly–it held that lower courts must automatically stay involuntary medication orders pending appeal. Note that aspects of this decision apply to pre-trial and trial competency proceedings as well as postconviction competency proceedings.
SCOW: State bears burden at postconviction competency hearings
State v. Roddee W. Daniel, 2015 WI 44, 4/29/15, affirming and modifying a published court of appeals decision; opinion by Justice Bradley; case activity (including briefs)
This opinion clarifies the procedure for determining the competency of a defendant during postconviction proceedings by holding that once the issue of a defendant’s competency has been raised, the state bears the burden of showing by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is competent to proceed.
State v. Roddee W. Daniel, 2012AP2692-CR, petition for review granted 9/18/14
On review of a published court of appeals decision; case activity
Issue (adapted from Daniel’s PFR):
1. Under Wisconsin law, should the defendant bear the burden of proving incompetency? If so, is it by clear and convincing evidence or by a preponderance of the evidence?
2. When postconviction counsel questions the defendant’s competency, but the defendant insists that he is competent, what procedures should the circuit court employ?
3. What standard of review should an appellate court apply to a circuit court’s determination of a defendant’s competency to participate in postconviction proceedings?
Court of Appeals addresses burden of proof for determining competency during postconviction proceedings
State v. Roddee W. Daniel, 2014 WI App 46, petition for review granted 9/18/14, modified and affirmed, 2015 WI 44; case activity
When postconviction counsel questions a defendant’s competency to understand his or her § 809.30 appellate rights or ability to effectively communicate with counsel but the defendant asserts he or she is competent, defense counsel has the burden of proving the defendant is incompetent by the preponderance or greater weight of the evidence.