Wisconsin Supreme Court Weighs Forced Medication in Criminal Case

Court Reviews Competency Dispute

MADISON, Wis. — The Wisconsin Supreme Court is considering whether a lower court had the authority to order forced medication for a Milwaukee man facing criminal charges. The case raises broader questions about when the state can require defendants to take psychiatric drugs against their will.

The case involves Jared, who was 19 years old when he was arrested in 2022 for battery against a police officer. His mother had called police to their home during what was described as a mental health crisis. According to a criminal complaint, Jared threatened to kill family members and punched an officer after police arrived.

Jared has been diagnosed with schizophrenia and other conditions. In 2023, a Milwaukee County judge ruled he should be given anti-psychotic medication to make him competent to stand trial. That decision was overturned by a state appeals court, prompting the attorney general’s office to ask the state’s high court to step in.

State Argues for Public Interest

Assistant Attorney General Kara Janson told justices the trial court’s order was consistent with the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2003 decision in Sell v. United States. That ruling allows forced medication in limited circumstances if the state can show an important interest in bringing a case to trial.

“Looking at the nature of the crime, it was violent,” Janson said, pointing to the assault on a police officer and threats against family members. She argued that the government has a duty to protect the public and pursue justice regardless of a defendant’s mental health status.

Janson also said the case may now be moot because the original order requiring Jared to take medication has expired.

Defense Pushes Higher Bar

Assistant State Public Defender Lucas Swank countered that prosecutors had not met the legal threshold required to justify the order. He said a psychiatrist who recommended medication failed to provide an individualized plan.

“The state needs to prove to circuit courts, or convince them by clear and convincing evidence, that the medications being offered are appropriate,” Swank told the justices. While acknowledging the seriousness of the charge, he maintained that the appeals court correctly struck down the Milwaukee judge’s order.

Medical Groups File Briefs

The Wisconsin Psychiatric Association submitted a friend-of-the-court brief supporting the state. The group argued that psychiatrists cannot predict in advance exactly which medications or doses will work, and that rigid requirements would interfere with treatment.

“The court of appeals’ heightened standard for obtaining an involuntary medication order is not based in science, does not align with clinical practice, and places unnecessary and burdensome requirements on the treating psychiatrist,” the association wrote.

The Wisconsin Department of Health Services also urged reversal, saying the appellate decision creates confusion and undermines medical judgment.

Appeals Court Found Mitigating Factors

In its ruling last year, the appeals court noted that Jared might have a strong argument for being found not guilty by reason of insanity if his case went to trial. The court also pointed to his lengthy detention — more than 100 days in jail before being transferred to a state mental health institute — as lessening the state’s interest in prosecution.

“We conclude that this unconstitutional detention further lessens the importance of the State’s interest in prosecuting Jared for purposes of Sell,” the court wrote.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has not yet indicated when it will issue a decision.