Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

c. Due process/vagueness

State v. Scott R. Nelson, 2007 WI App 2, PFR filed 1/22/07 For Nelson: Joseph L. Sommers Issue/Holding: ¶15      … Even under the “more likely than not” standard, there must be a strong nexus between the person’s mental disorder and that person’s level of dangerousness. Under this standard, the likelihood that the person will engage in… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Terry L. Olson, 2006 WI App 32, PFR filed 3/16 For Olson: Melinda A. Swartz, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue: Whether ch. 980 is unconstitutional because the SVP definition of “dangerousness” is not linked to imminent risk. Holding: ¶5       We deem Olson’s reliance on Lessard misplaced. In 2002, our own supreme court considered a challenge to Wis. Stat. ch. 51… Read More

{ 0 comments }

SVP – Pretrial Release

State v. Shawn Virlee, 2003 WI App 4, PFR filed 1/3/03 For Virlee: Jack E. Schairer Issue: Whether ch. 980 violates due process and/or equal protection because it doesn’t allow for pretrial release. Holding: ¶14. We decline to address Virlee’s due process and equal protection arguments because he fails to establish, and we do not see, how… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. John Lee Laxton, 2002 WI 82, affirming unpublished court of appeals decision (Affirmed on habeas review, John L. Laxton v. Bartow, 421 F.3d 565 (7th Cir 2005)) For Laxton: Margaret A. Maroney, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether ch. 980 is unconstitutional by failing to adequately narrow the class of commitment subjects to those with serious difficulty controlling… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Isaac H. Williams, State v. Willie Hogan, 2001 WI App 263, PFR filed 11/23/01 For Williams: Donna L. Hintze, SPD, Madison Appellate For Hogan: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue1: Whether the § 980.08(1) requirement that the SVP wait 18 months after initial commitment before petitioning for supervised release violates substantive due process. Holding… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Ronald Ransdell, 2001 WI App 202, PFR filed 8/27/01 For Ransdell: Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue: Whether the automatic initial commitment to institutional care provision, § 980.06, on its face violates substantive due process. Holding: A person challenging the constitutionality of a statute must show its infirmity beyond reasonable doubt; a statute restricting liberty… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Reuben Adams v. Bartow, 330 F.3d 957 (7th Cir. 2003), denying habeas relief in State v. Adams, 223 Wis. 2d 60, 588 N.W.2d 336 (Ct. App. 1998) For Adams: Samuel Arena (Foley & Lardner) Issue: Whether the state court affirmance of Adams’ commitment unreasonably applied Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U.S. 346 (1997) or Foucha v. Louisiana, 504 U.S. 71 (1992)… Read More

{ 0 comments }