Juvenile Waiver Reports — ex parte communications

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Criminal

Juvenile Waiver Reports — ex parte communications

The Department of Health and Human Services is not barred from consulting with the district attorney in preparing a waiver investigation report.

“We conclude that the circuit court did not err in denying Tyler’s request to strike the waiver investigation report prepared by the DHHS. While we, like the circuit court, have reservations about the DHHS’s decision to invite only ADA Wiedenfeld to its final staffing meeting, we decline to create a bright-line rule precluding the DHHS from communicating directly with either party, be it the State or the juvenile, for purposes of preparing a waiver investigation report. Rather, consistent with the DHHS’s role in delinquency proceedings and in furtherance of the express objectives of Wis. Stat. ch. 938, we conclude that the DHHS is free to compile information for a waiver investigation report in the manner it deems most beneficial to the circuit court.”

“Wisconsin Stat. § 938.18(2m) grants the circuit court discretionary authority to ‘designate an agency, as defined in s. 938.38(1)(a), to submit a report analyzing the criteria [for waiver of juvenile court jurisdiction] specified in sub. (5).’ Wisconsin Stat. § 938.38(1)(a) defines ‘agency’ as the DOC, a county department (like the DHHS in this case), or a licensed child welfare agency. Wisconsin Stat. § 938.18(2m) further provides that ‘[t]he court may rely on facts stated in the report in making its findings with respect to the criteria under sub. (5).’ Pursuant to § 938.18(5), the criteria for waiver of juvenile court jurisdiction include the personality of the juvenile; the prior record of the juvenile; the type and seriousness of the juvenile’s offense; the adequacy and suitability of facilities, services, and procedures available for treatment of the juvenile and protection of the public within the juvenile justice system; and, if the juvenile was allegedly associated in the offense with persons who will be charged in the court of criminal jurisdiction, the desirability of trial and disposition of the entire offense in one court.”

Affirmed.

2010AP784 State v. Tyler T.

Ziegler, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Alesia, Susan E., Madison; For Respondent: Weber, Gregory M., Madison; Wiedenfeld, Zeke, Elkhorn