Legal Opinion · Concurrence

W.J.C. v. County of Vilas

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided April 9, 1985No. 84-966Published

1ConcurrenceCane, P.J.

I agree with the majority that telephone testimony is admissible in involuntary commitment hearings. I write separately, however, to emphasize the constitutional distinction between criminal actions and civil commitment proceedings. For purposes of due process analysis, a civil commitment proceeding cannot be equated to a criminal prosecution. Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418, 428 (1979); see also Milwaukee County v. Parham, 95 Wis. 2d 21, 25, 289 N.W.2d 326, 328 (Ct. App. 1979).

A civil commitment constitutes a significant deprivation of liberty that requires due process protection.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Addington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Parham v. J. R.Supreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. State v. BauerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Milwaukee County v. ParhamCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1979

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API