Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · Wisconsin · Chapter 971 — Criminal procedure — proceedings before and at trial

971.13 Competency.

368 words·~2 min read·/wi/chapter-971/971-13-3

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

971.13 Competency.
(1)No person who lacks substantial mental capacity to understand the proceedings or assist in his or her own defense may be tried, convicted or sentenced for the commission of an offense so long as the incapacity endures.
(2)A defendant shall not be determined incompetent to proceed solely because medication has been or is being administered to restore or maintain competency.
(3)The fact that a defendant is not competent to proceed does not preclude any legal objection to the prosecution under s. 971.31 which is susceptible of fair determination prior to trial and without the personal participation of the defendant.
(4)The fact that a defendant is not competent to proceed does not preclude a hearing under s. 968.38
(4)or
(5)unless the probable cause finding required to be made at the hearing cannot be fairly made without the personal participation of the defendant.
971.13 Note Judicial Council Committee’s Note, 1981: Fundamental fairness precludes criminal prosecution of a defendant who is not mentally competent to exercise his or her constitutional and procedural rights. State ex rel. Matalik v. Schubert, 57 Wis. 2d 315 , 322 (1973).
971.13 Note Sub.
(1)states the competency standard in conformity with Dusky v. U.S., 362 U.S. 402
(1960)and State ex rel. Haskins v. Dodge County Court, 62 Wis. 2d 250 , 265 (1974). Competency is a judicial rather than a medical determination. Not every mentally disordered defendant is incompetent; the court must consider the degree of impairment in the defendant’s capacity to assist counsel and make decisions which counsel cannot make for him or her. See State v. Harper, 57 Wis. 2d 543 (1973); Norwood v. State, 74 Wis. 2d 343 (1976); State v. Albright, 96 Wis. 2d 122 (1980); Pickens v. State, 96 Wis. 2d 549 (1980).
971.13 Note Sub.
(2)clarifies that a defendant who requires medication to remain competent is nevertheless competent; the court may order the defendant to be administered such medication for the duration of the criminal proceedings under s. 971.14
(5)(c).
971.13 Note Sub.
(3)is identical to prior s. 971.14 (6). It has been renumbered for better statutory placement, adjacent to the rule which it clarifies. [Bill 765-A]
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.