Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 938.19 (2026)
Taking a juvenile into custody
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
938.19(1)(c)(c) A court order if there is a showing that the welfare of the juvenile demands that the juvenile be immediately removed from his or her present custody. The order shall specify that the juvenile be held in custody under s. 938.207.
938.19(1)(d)(d) Circumstances in which a law enforcement officer believes on reasonable grounds that any of the following conditions exists:
938.19(1)(d)1.1. A capias or a warrant for the juvenile’s apprehension has been issued in this state, or the juvenile is a fugitive from justice.
938.19(1)(d)2.2. A capias or a warrant for the juvenile’s apprehension has been issued in another state.
938.19(1)(d)3.3. The juvenile is committing or has committed an act which is a violation of a state or federal criminal law.
938.19(1)(d)4.4. The juvenile has run away from his or her parents, guardian or legal or physical custodian.
938.19(1)(d)5.5. The juvenile is suffering from illness or injury or is in immediate danger from his or her surroundings and removal from those surroundings is necessary.
938.19(1)(d)6.6. The juvenile has violated a condition of court-ordered supervision, community supervision, or aftercare supervision; a condition of the juvenile’s placement in a Type 2 juvenile correctional facility or a Type 2 residential care center for children and youth; or a condition of the juvenile’s participation in the intensive supervision program under s. 938.534.
938.19(1)(d)7.7. The juvenile has violated the conditions of an order under s. 938.21 (4) or of an order for temporary physical custody issued by an intake worker.
938.19(1)(d)8.8. The juvenile has violated a civil law or a local ordinance punishable by a forfeiture, except that in that case the juvenile shall be released immediately under s. 938.20 (2) (ag) or as soon as reasonably possible under s. 938.20 (2) (b) to (g).
938.19(1m)(1m) Truancy. A juvenile who is absent from school without an acceptable excuse under s. 118.15 may be taken into custody by an individual designated under s. 118.16 (2m) (a) if the school attendance officer of the school district in which the juvenile resides, or the juvenile’s parent, guardian, or legal custodian, requests that the juvenile be taken into custody. The request shall specifically identify the juvenile.
938.19(2)(2) Notification of parent, guardian, legal custodian, Indian custodian. When a juvenile is taken into physical custody under this section, the person taking the juvenile into custody shall immediately attempt to notify the parent, guardian, legal custodian, and Indian custodian of the juvenile by the most practical means. The person taking the juvenile into custody shall continue such attempt until the parent, guardian, legal custodian, and Indian custodian of the juvenile are notified, or the juvenile is delivered to an intake worker under s. 938.20 (3), whichever occurs first. If the juvenile is delivered to the intake worker before the parent, guardian, legal custodian, and Indian custodian are notified, the intake worker, or another person at his or her direction, shall continue the attempt to notify until the parent, guardian, legal custodian, and Indian custodian of the juvenile are notified.
938.19(3)(3) Not an arrest. Taking into custody is not an arrest except for the purpose of determining whether the taking into custody or the obtaining of any evidence is lawful.
938.19 AnnotationA juvenile may not be taken into custody under sub. (1) (d) 8. for violating an ordinance that does not impose a forfeiture although a forfeiture may be imposed under s. 48.343 (2) [now s. 938.343]. In Interest of J.F.F., 164 Wis. 2d 10, 473 N.W.2d 546 (Ct. App. 1991).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1997–2023 · leading case: State v. Kelsey C.R., 2001 WI 54 (Wis. 2001).
State v. Kelsey C.R., 2001 WI 54 (Wis. 2001). “" Wis. Stat. §§ 938.19 (1)(d)8 and 938.20(2)(ag).”
State v. Jerrell C.J., 2005 WI 105 (Wis. 2005). “Wis. Stat. § 938.19 (2). [9] V ¶ 44. The final issue we consider is whether to adopt a rule requiring the state to electronically record all juvenile interrogations.”
State v. Raheem Moore, 2015 WI 54 (Wis. 2015). “The court said: "All custodial interrogation of juveniles in future cases shall be 19 Although the parties discussed at some length the absence of Moore's father during the interrogation, the record contains no express allegation that there was a violation of Wis. Stat. § 938.19…”
State v. Dull, 565 N.W.2d 575 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997). “1 Nonetheless, this finding is superfluous *660 because the deputy had already stepped out of the caretaking function when he took custody of Matthew under § 938.19(1), Stats. Indeed, we find it difficult to imagine an instance where a law enforcement officer who takes action…”
State v. Tyler T., 2012 WI 52 (Wis. 2012). “18 provides, in relevant part, that the district attorney, the juvenile, or the court may petition for waiver of juvenile court jurisdiction if "[t]he juvenile is alleged to have violated any state criminal law on or after the juvenile's 15th birthday.”
State v. Raheem Moore (Wis. 2015). “The court said: "All custodial interrogation of juveniles in future cases shall be 19 Although the parties discussed at some length the absence of Moore's father during the interrogation, the record contains no express allegation that there was a violation of Wis. Stat. § 938.19…”
Marshall v. Petropoulous (E.D. Wis. 2023). “Section 938.19(2), they failed to perform a required ministerial duty and are thus barred from governmental immunity.”
Wis. Stat. § 938.19(1): 1 case
State v. Dull, 565 N.W.2d 575 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997). “1 Nonetheless, this finding is superfluous *660 because the deputy had already stepped out of the caretaking function when he took custody of Matthew under § 938.19(1), Stats. Indeed, we find it difficult to imagine an instance where a law enforcement officer who takes action…”
Wis. Stat. § 938.19(1)(d): 1 case
State v. Dull, 565 N.W.2d 575 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997). “1 Nonetheless, this finding is superfluous *660 because the deputy had already stepped out of the caretaking function when he took custody of Matthew under § 938.19(1), Stats. Indeed, we find it difficult to imagine an instance where a law enforcement officer who takes action…”
Wis. Stat. § 938.19(2): 2 cases
State v. Jerrell C.J., 2005 WI 105 (Wis. 2005). “Wis. Stat. § 938.19 (2). [9] V ¶ 44. The final issue we consider is whether to adopt a rule requiring the state to electronically record all juvenile interrogations.”
Marshall v. Petropoulous (E.D. Wis. 2023). “Section 938.19(2), they failed to perform a required ministerial duty and are thus barred from governmental immunity.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.