957 N.W.2d 583
Wis. Ct. App.2021Background
- Green was charged with first-degree intentional homicide; court-ordered competency evaluations found him incompetent and diagnosed with psychotic disorder.
- Court-appointed psychiatrist Dr. Schoenecker testified medication (Haldol) could likely restore competency; circuit court committed Green under Wis. Stat. §971.14 for up to 12 months and ordered involuntary medication under the Sell framework.
- Green appealed and obtained an automatic stay of the involuntary-medication order; the State moved in circuit court to lift the stay and to toll the 12‑month commitment period while treatment was stayed.
- The circuit court allowed supplemental evidence, again found the Sell factors satisfied, lifted the stay, and tolled the commitment period.
- On appeal the Court of Appeals reversed: it held the State failed to present a medically informed, individualized treatment plan (defeating the Sell second and fourth factors) and that the court lacked statutory authority to toll the §971.14 commitment period; it ordered Green’s discharge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Green) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence satisfied Sell to authorize involuntary medication to restore competency | State: Schoenecker’s reports + proposed Haldol plan (drug, max dose, duration) and testimony suffice as an individualized treatment plan and meet Sell factors | Green: Plan was generic; treating clinicians had not evaluated Green or his medical records, so no individualized, medically informed plan supporting Sell | Held: Reversed—State failed to meet Sell’s second and fourth factors because no medically informed, individualized treatment plan tied to Green existed; involuntary-medication order vacated |
| Whether court had authority to toll the §971.14 commitment period while treatment was stayed | State: Tolling necessary because defendant was not receiving treatment while the order was stayed and custody should pause until treatment occurs | Green: Statute fixes commitment at "not to exceed 12 months" and court cannot extend/toll that period | Held: Reversed—court lacked authority to toll; commitment cannot exceed the statutory period and Green must be discharged |
| Whether circuit court had authority/competency to hear State’s motion to lift the automatic stay | State: Motion to lift stay may be litigated in circuit court; Scott does not require stay-lifting motions be filed only in the court of appeals | Green: Scott and Rule 809.12 imply the court of appeals must decide lift-stay motions; circuit court lacked competency to hear State’s motion | Held: Affirmed—circuit court had competency to hear State’s motion to lift the automatic stay (issue ultimately moot given reversal of medication order) |
Key Cases Cited
- Sell v. United States, 539 U.S. 166 (2003) (establishes four‑factor constitutional test for involuntary medication to restore trial competency)
- State v. Fitzgerald, 387 Wis. 2d 384 (Wis. 2019) (Wisconsin courts must apply Sell when ordering involuntary medication under §971.14)
- State v. Scott, 382 Wis. 2d 476 (Wis. 2018) (automatic stay of involuntary‑medication orders pending appeal; State may move to lift stay under modified Gudenschwager factors)
- Jackson v. Indiana, 406 U.S. 715 (1972) (due process limits on civil commitment of criminal defendants incapable of standing trial)
- State ex rel. Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane Cnty., 271 Wis. 2d 633 (Wis. 2004) (statutory interpretation principles)
- State v. Moore, 167 Wis. 2d 491 (Wis. 1992) (purpose of §971.14 commitment is treatment to restore competency, not punishment)