State v. Donald L. White, 2020AP275-CR, 11/3/2022, District 4 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) We hope SCOW reviews this decision. An examiner opined that White was competent to proceed under §971.14 but refused to give her opinion to a reasonable degree of professional certainty. In fact, she thought White should be observed… Read more
3. Burden of proof
State v. Fitzgerald, 2018AP1296-CR, 2019 WI 69, 6/13/19; case activity Sell v. United States, 539 U.S. 166 (2003) held that a mentally ill defendant has a constitutional right to avoid unwanted antipsychotic medication. The State can force it on him to restore his competency for trial only by proving the 4 “Sell factors.” Fitzgerald holds that §971.14… Read more
State v. Andre L. Scott, 2016AP2017-CR, bypass granted 9/12/17, case activity (including briefs) Issues: 1. Whether, despite State v. Debra A.E., 188 Wis. 2d 111, 523 N.W.2d 727 (1994), a circuit court may use §971.14(4)(b) to require a nondangerous defendant to be treated to competency against his will, and if so, whether §971.14(4)(b) is unconstitutional on… Read more
State v. Leo E. Wanta, 224 Wis.2d 679, 592 N.W.2d 645 (Ct. App. 1999) For Wanta: James M. Shellow HOLDING: Wanta argues that Wis. Stat. § 971.14(4)(b) is unconstitutional, because it requires proof of incompetence by clear and convincing evidence when the defendant claims that s/he is competent (vs. proof of competency by mere greater… Read more
