On Point

State v. N.K.B., 2026 WI 22, 6/26/26, affirming a published decision of the court of appeals; case activity

SCOW holds that criminal courts cannot order involuntary medication of a defendant committed for purposes of competency restoration on the basis that he or she is dangerous.

Chatrie v. United States, USSC No. 25-112, 6/29/2026, reversing a decision of the 4th Circuit, Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)

SCOTUS determined that police conduct a search when they gain access to location history data from a third party because a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy in records about his or her cell phone’s location.  The Court remanded to the federal court of appeals to determine whether the geofence warrant at issue was reasonable.

State v. Dominic L. Brister, 2024AP1516-CR, 6/30/26, District I (recommended for publication); case activity

COA issues a broad defense win, holding that the First Amendment forbids the extreme no-contact order entered in this case.

Waukesha County v. R.D.T., 2026 WI 24, 6/30/26, affirming an unpublished decision of the court of appeals; case activity

SCOW refuses an invitation to retreat from previous decisions making it difficult for a Chapter 51 appeal to be moot but ultimately holds that R.D.T. is not entitled to relief as a result of the allegedly improper admission of hearsay evidence.

State v. Nicholas B. Selerski., 2024AP1846-CR, 6/25/26, District IV (certification opinion); case activity

In a case that might make many appellate attorneys justifiably nervous, COA asks whether we’ve all been getting sentencing law wrong for decades.

Outagamie County v. M.J.B., 2026 WI 23, 6/26/26, reversing a published decision of the court of appeals; case activity

In a unanimous decision, SCOW held that the deadline to provide access to examiners’ 48 hours in advance of the final hearing is not central to Chapter 51’s statutory scheme, violating the deadline does not divest the circuit court of competency to proceed, and the circuit court must therefore review whether failing to comply with the deadline was harmless error.

Waupaca County Department of Health & Human Services v. J.L.C. and M.M.C., 2026AP498 and 647, 6/25/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity

JLC and MMC each appeal the circuit court order terminating their parental rights to their child, CMC, arguing that the court erred in granting Waupaca County’s motion for summary judgment on grounds. COA concludes that the ground on which SJ was granted, continuing denial of visitation, requires the county to prove that the parents received adequate notice of the conditions of resuming visitation, and the county cannot make this showing under the facts. Therefore, COA reverses the order and remands with directions that the circuit court grant partial summary judgment to both parents on the continuing denial of visitation ground. 

La Crosse County v. P.A.E., 2025AP303, 6/18/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity

COA reverses the circuit court’s order continuing PAE’s protective placement on the basis that La Crosse County failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that PAE was so totally incapable of providing for her own care or custody as to create a substantial risk of serious harm to herself or others.

Wolford v. Lopez, USSC No. 24-1046, 6/25/2026, reversing a decision of the 9th Circuit, Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)

In another contentious 2nd Amendment case, SCOTUS provides more information for litigators seeking to apply the newer test for evaluating challenged firearm regulations.

State v. Terral Dontae Wallace, 2024AP2150-CR, 6/23/26, District III (recommended for publication); case activity

Although there is no dispute that the circuit court failed to advise Wallace of a presumptive minimum sentence during the plea colloquy, the court of appeals determines that no evidentiary hearing is required and affirms.