Court Opinion

ID: 9660800
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 22:21:14.312697+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:22.402926
License: Public Domain

*859SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, J.
(dissenting). Section 971.14(4)(b) as amended in 1981 expressly states that the district attorney, the defendant, and the defense counsel each must agree to waive the right to present evidence at a competency hearing. The statute provides that "if the district attorney, the defendant and defense counsel waive their respective opportunities to present other evidence on the issue, the court shall promptly determine the defendant’s competency . . .(emphasis added).
The Special Materials prepared by the Wisconsin Criminal Justice Jury Committee advise that "the defendant's waiver should be on the record, should be concurred in by defense counsel, and should be accepted only after the court has explained the nature of the hearing that is being waived." SM-50 (6/91) at p. 12.1 conclude, as did the Committee, that the statute means what it says — the defendant must personally waive the evidentiary hearing at which he or she could personally present evidence; the defense counsel cannot waive the evidentiary hearing on behalf of the defendant.
Under the guise of interpretation the majority opinion simply reads the words "defendant" and "their respective opportunities" out of the statute. For the reasons stated, I dissent.
I am authorized to state that Justices Donald W. Steinmetz and William A. Bablitch join this dissent.