On Point blog, page 1 of 1
Sanction for violation of juvenile disposition order limited to 10 calendar days
State v. A.A., 2020 WI App 11; case activity
Wisconsin Stat. § 938.355(6)(d)1. sets a maximum length of “not more than 10 days” for a custody sanction that a circuit court may impose on a juvenile who has violated a dispositional order. Is that 10 calendar days? Or, as the state argues, does “day” mean 24 consecutive hours, so that the maximum sanction is 10 consecutive 24-hour periods? It’s a calendar day, essentially, holds the court of appeals.
Running away for six days is one violation of juvenile disposition order, not six
State v. D.L.L., 2018AP1064-FT, District 2, 11/21/18 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
D.L.L., who was under a delinquency dispositional order placing him at his mother’s home, ran away for six days. The state moved for sanctions, alleging six violations of the dispositional order, one for each day he was gone. The juvenile court agreed that each day could be a separate violation. The juvenile court was wrong.
The latest on juvenile brain development and crime
This article by Elizabeth Scott, Natashal Duell and Laurence Steinberg is one of the top downloads about criminal law on the SSRN this week. It looks at how a juvenile’s brain development and social environment affects his or her decision to engage in risky behavior and criminal activity. It responds to critics who note that all juveniles experience brain development but most don’t commit crimes. And it offers evidence to support more lenient sanctions for juveniles.
Delinquency Sanctions: Municipal Truancy – Electronic Monitoring; Judicial Bias / (Juvenile) Disqualification: Judge’s Initiation of Sanctions Works Disqualifier
State v. Dylan S. / Renee B., 2012 WI App 25 (recommended for publication); for Dylan S.: Devon M. Lee, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity; for Renee B.: Susan E. Alesia, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
Delinquency – Sanctions – Municipal Truancy
After finding the juveniles in violation of first-offense truancy under the local municipal code, the trial court set compliance conditions. The court did not,
Delinquency — sanctions for violation of disposition order — exercise of discretion
State v. Mercedes S., 2012AP1524, District 2, 1/16/13
Court of appeals decision (1 judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
Delinquency — sanctions for violation of disposition order — exercise of discretion
Imposition of additional period of secure detention upheld, against challenge that the court did not consider other options and, contrary to State v. Ogden, 199 Wis. 2d 566, 544 N.W.2d 574 (1996),