Opinion ID: 6496174
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: S. was 15-1/2 years old.

Text: ¶16 After X.S. was detained, the State filed an amended petition for juvenile delinquency, charging X.S. with eight counts of first-degree reckless injury with use of a dangerous weapon and one count of illegal possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18 years of age. The petition described in detail the corroborated witness testimony of the shooting and the video evidence depicting X.S.'s involvement and flight from the scene. The day after the charges were filed, the State filed a petition to waive X.S. into adult court to face criminal prosecution. The State explained that X.S. was adjudicated delinquent in August 2020 and X.S. had failed to comply with court-ordered conditions, and reasoned that, given X.S.'s documented failures with the juvenile system, the adult system is better able to provide appropriate accountability and address his long-term rehabilitative needs. ¶17 After a short period of discovery and psychological evaluations of X.S., the circuit court held a combined sanctions hearing for X.S.'s August 2020 case and a waiver hearing for the November 2020 case. The defense did not contest the prosecutive merit in the State's delinquency and waiver petitions. ¶18 At the hearing, X.S.'s HSW testified and described in detail his treatment progression and lack of compliance with the juvenile system. The testimony corresponded to X.S.'s past behavior and treatment history recounted above. See, supra, ¶¶5-11. Nonetheless, the HSW recommended that X.S. remain in 12 No. 2021AP419 the juvenile system and concluded that the juvenile system can provide effective treatment and services. ¶19 X.S. called Dr. David Thompson as a witness. Dr. Thompson was a clinical psychologist hired by X.S. to conduct a psychological evaluation of X.S. for the waiver hearing. Dr. Thompson stated that he reviewed the delinquency petition, as well as the August 2020 juvenile disposition order. However, he did not consider X.S.'s record while on juvenile supervision, police reports of the mall shootings, and video evidence of X.S.'s actions while at the mall, specifically X.S.'s pause in shooting and his taking aim at a fleeing victim. Dr. Thompson was also unaware that X.S.'s family conspired to move X.S. out of state and escape arrest. Dr. Thompson explained in his written report that he relied on statements from X.S.'s mother to conclude that X.S. was compliant and had completed the Running Rebels program. Dr. Thompson concluded that, because X.S. had strong social support and a positive attitude toward intervention and authority, X.S. was a low risk to reengage in violent behavior with treatment. ¶20 Dr. Thompson explained that X.S. reported to him emotional distress as a result of the April 2020 shooting where X.S. was shot. X.S. told Dr. Thompson that since that date, he had experienced serious episodes of paranoia, depression, and anxiety. X.S. provided Dr. Thompson a description of the mall shooting. According to Dr. Thompson, X.S. stated the four other individuals at the mall had previously threatened X.S. X.S. and E.G. were not looking for the group, but simply ran into them. 13 No. 2021AP419 E.G. approached the group and punched one member, and X.S. felt threatened. Under this account, X.S. pulled out a gun, closed his eyes, and fired until the magazine was empty. Based on all this information, Dr. Thompson believed X.S. was experiencing symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and his needs with proper treatment could be more than adequately addressed within . . . twelve months within the juvenile system. X.S. offered no testimony, affidavits, or other evidence to support this account of events. ¶21 At the hearing, the State noted that most juveniles, even the most violent, spend only about six to nine months in correctional placements before they are released into the community under supervision. X.S. did not contest this description of the probable length of confinement. It was also uncontested that the most serious action that could be taken if X.S. proceeded as a juvenile was confinement in a correctional facility, which would at most last until X.S. turned 18 years old. See Wis. Stat. §§ 938.355(4)(b), 938.34(4m). Given X.S.'s birthdate and the circuit court's scheduling, any juvenile disposition order could only have been entered several months after X.S. turned 16 years old, leaving by statute less than two years as the maximum confinement period. Id. ¶22 After receiving evidence, the circuit court denied the State's petition for waiver, concluding that the State had not met its burden to waive X.S. into adult court. The State filed a petition with the court of appeals for leave to appeal the circuit court's waiver decision as a nonfinal order. 14 No. 2021AP419 ¶23 The court of appeals granted the State's petition for leave to appeal. In July 2021, the court of appeals reversed the decision of the circuit court and remanded the case to the circuit court to conduct another waiver hearing. State v. X.S., No. 2021AP419, unpublished slip op., ¶¶1, 30. The court of appeals reasoned that the circuit court inappropriately relied on unverified hearsay, recounted through Dr. Thompson's testimony of X.S.'s account of the mall shootings. Id., ¶18. Further, the circuit court improperly considered statements that contradicted the State's delinquency petition. Id., ¶¶19-21. According to the court of appeals, the circuit court also failed to provide adequate explanation or analysis on the seriousness of the offenses, protection of the public, the time remaining in the juvenile system, and X.S.'s familial support, specifically X.S.'s family's assistance with his escape from police after the shooting. Id., ¶¶22-29. The court of appeals concluded that the circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion. Id., ¶30. ¶24 X.S. petitioned this court for review, and we granted the petition in October 2021.