≡ Menu

b. Standard of review

State v. Jamie Lane Stephenson, 2020 WI 92, 12/18/20, affirming a published decision of the court of appeals; case activity (including briefs) A five-justice majority of the supreme court holds that the state does not need to present expert opinion testimony that a person subject to commitment under Chapter 980 is dangerous to others because… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. David Hager, Jr., 2017 WI App 8, petition for review granted 5/15/17; reversed 4/19/18; case activity (including briefs) This is the first (likely) published case to construe the 2013 amendments to the ch. 980 discharge petition standard. The court of appeals holds that while the legislature required a committed person seeking a discharge… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Review of an unpublished summary court of appeals order; case activity (including briefs) Issues (from petition for review): 1. Was the Petitioner entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his petition for discharge from Chapter 980 commitment which included information that the Petitioner had terminated sexual acting out and where a psychologist reported improvement in an… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Richard A. Brown, 2005 WI 29, reversing 2004 WI App 33, 269 Wis. 2d 750, 767 N.W.2d 555 For Brown: Steven P. Weiss, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶8. The issue presented by the parties in the instant case is whether a circuit court’s denial of a chapter 980 petition for supervised release should be classified… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Richard A. Brown, 2005 WI 29, reversing 2004 WI App 33, 269 Wis. 2d 750, 767 N.W.2d 555 For Brown: Steven P. Weiss, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Where the only witness at Brown’s supervised release hearing was an expert who supported release, and the evidence indisputably showed favorable response to treatment, the State failed to meet… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Frank Curiel, 227 Wis.2d 389, 597 N.W.2d 697 (1999), affirming unpublished decision For Curiel: Jack.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… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS