|
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND RELEASED September 19, 1996 |
NOTICE |
|
A party may file with the
Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of
Appeals. See § 808.10 and
Rule 809.62, Stats. |
This opinion is subject to
further editing. If published, the
official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports. |
No. 96-1205-NM
STATE
OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF
APPEALS
DISTRICT IV
In the Matter of the
Guardianship
of George K.: COUNTY OF LA CROSSE,
Petitioner-Respondent,
v.
GEORGE K.,
Respondent-Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of
the circuit court for La Crosse County:
DENNIS G. MONTABON, Judge. Affirmed.
EICH, C.J.[1] Counsel
for George K. filed a no merit report pursuant to Rule 809.32, Stats. George K. was informed of his right to file
a response and elected not to respond.
Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), we conclude there is no issue of
arguable merit that could be raised on appeal.
The trial court granted
La Crosse County's petition for protective placement under § 55.06, Stats., based on its findings that
George K. has a primary need for residential care and custody, that he is
incompetent, that as a result of his incapacity he is so totally incapable of
providing for his own care or custody as to create a serious risk of harm to
himself and that his disability is permanent or likely to be permanent. George K. has been living at the Lakeview
Health Center since a 1993 court order under chapter 51, Stats., relating to his alcohol
abuse. In June 1995, his commitment was
extended for one year without objection.
A psychologist testified that George K. suffers from chronic paranoid
schizophrenia, alcohol dependence and hypertension. He has difficulty following treatment programs and often neglects
his personal hygiene.
The impetus for the
permanent guardianship and protective placement was the doctors' discovery of a
tumor on George K.'s neck at the lymph node.
Physicians performed a needle biopsy and found some abnormal cells. George K. refused further treatment, stating
that he believes the doctors just "fouled up" or injected the
abnormal cells into his neck. He states
that he does not want to be cured even if the tumor is cancer because he wants
to die to "take his rightful place in heaven." He believes he is a saint and that when he
dies he will be the husband of the Virgin Mary because she told him so. The trial court accepted the testimony of an
expert witness who testified that George K.'s schizophrenia causes him to operate
under a systematic delusional system that interferes with his ability to make
rational decisions based on self-interest.
The no merit report
addresses the standard for determining incompetency, the sufficiency of the
evidence to support the finding that George K. is incompetent, and the sufficiency
of the evidence supporting the finding that George K. is incapable of
providing for his own care so as to create a substantial risk of harm to
himself. Our independent review of the
record discloses no basis for appeal on these issues.
The trial court applied
the correct standard when determining competency. It applied the standard set forth in § 880.01(4), Stats.
Sections 880.01(7m) and 51.61(1)(g)4, Stats.,
do not apply because this case does not involve George K.'s refusal to take
psychotropic medications.
The trial court's
findings that George K. is incompetent and incapable of providing for his own
care so as to create a substantial risk of harm to himself are supported by
adequate evidence. The psychologist's
testimony that George K.'s decision to refuse medical treatment is the result
of a systematic delusional system rather than a reasoned choice supports these
findings. George K.'s refusal of
further medical treatment creates a substantial risk of harm to himself.
Our independent review
of the record discloses no other potential issues for appeal. Therefore, we relieve Attorney Jeri Urbanski
of further representing George K. in this matter and affirm the protective
placement order.
By the Court.—Order
affirmed.