The reverse-waiver decision followed testimony about treatment while the case’s underlying allegations remained central to the judge’s assessment of seriousness.
GREEN BAY, Wis. — A Wisconsin teenager’s effort to move an attempted homicide prosecution into juvenile court ended with the case remaining in the adult system, where allegations of an attack on his mother, threats found on a phone and questions about long-term treatment will continue to shape the proceedings.
Judge Beau Liegeois denied Ramone Waupoose’s reverse-waiver request after a hearing that required the court to balance treatment evidence against the seriousness of the alleged conduct. Waupoose, now 17, faces charges of attempted first-degree intentional homicide with use of a dangerous weapon and first-degree reckless injury with use of a dangerous weapon. Prosecutors say the charges arise from a July 16, 2025, confrontation at the family home in Suamico. The judge’s September decision does not establish that Waupoose committed the charged acts. It determines that the prosecution will remain under adult criminal jurisdiction while the allegations are litigated.
The criminal complaint describes a sequence that, according to Waupoose’s mother, began before the alleged physical attack. Nicole Waupoose told investigators that her son had run away and was returned home by authorities about two days before the incident. She said he was angry about being brought home. She also reported that he was upset because she had deleted rap videos from his YouTube account while working with parental controls. Those statements have drawn attention in reports about the case, but the complaint describes them as part of a larger period of concerning behavior rather than as a judicially established motive. No trial has determined why the alleged attack occurred.
Nicole Waupoose told investigators that her concern increased enough for her to remove potentially dangerous objects from the house. According to the complaint, she gathered knives, sharp kitchen utensils and tools including a drill, hammers and screwdrivers and locked them in her vehicle. She said she was monitoring household cameras and saw Ramone searching in the garage near a toolbox and a mattress. She later told police she believed he found a pair of pruning shears in that area. At the time, she said, she was worried primarily that he might harm himself. She told investigators she had not expected him to attack family members.
The complaint alleges that the electricity in the home later began switching off and on. Nicole Waupoose went toward the electrical box and encountered her son, authorities said. Prosecutors accuse him of attacking her with the pruning shears. She told investigators she used a garbage can as a shield and was eventually able to get away. She escaped from the residence with her younger son and called for help after leaving in a vehicle. Authorities reported injuries to her head, face, arms and back. Earlier reporting based on the complaint said she required staples and stitches. Deputies searching the residence said they found pruning shears about 2 feet long and observed blood nearby.
Another part of the prosecution’s evidence came from a phone recovered after the incident. According to the complaint, investigators reviewed messages that contained threats involving Waupoose’s mother, his younger brother and an ex-girlfriend. Authorities said some communications referred to plans to kill family members and make a recording. Earlier reporting said one exchange included an image of pruning shears. Prosecutors have described the messages as evidence relevant to the case, but the claims about their meaning and Waupoose’s intent remain allegations. The defense will have the opportunity to contest the state’s evidence as the prosecution continues.
Those allegations formed the backdrop to a later legal question about which justice system should handle the case. Waupoose was 16 when the alleged attack occurred. Wisconsin gives adult criminal courts original jurisdiction over juveniles accused of certain homicide-related crimes, including attempted first-degree intentional homicide. That meant prosecutors did not have to begin the case in juvenile court and then seek a traditional waiver into adult court. Instead, Waupoose’s lawyers had to pursue the process in the opposite direction, asking the criminal judge for what Wisconsin law calls a reverse waiver.
A reverse waiver requires more than showing that juvenile services exist. Wisconsin law places the burden on the juvenile to establish the required factors for transfer. Those considerations include whether the defendant could receive adequate treatment in the criminal justice system, whether moving jurisdiction to juvenile court would depreciate the seriousness of the offense and whether retaining adult jurisdiction is necessary for deterrence. The framework creates a presumption that the case remains in adult court unless the juvenile proves the statutory requirements. It was within that framework, rather than a general choice between punishment and rehabilitation, that Liegeois considered Waupoose’s request.
The defense presented psychologist Greg Van Rybroek, who testified that the juvenile system offered structure and services that would better meet Waupoose’s needs than adult prison. He said treatment in a juvenile setting could make Waupoose less likely to offend in the future and argued that transferring the case would not unduly diminish the seriousness of the allegations. Nicole Waupoose also supported the request. Despite being identified by prosecutors as the alleged victim, she told the court she believed her son would receive better treatment through the juvenile system. Her position gave the defense support from the person most directly affected by the alleged attack.
Assistant District Attorney Kim Hardtke argued that adult court remained the proper forum and noted that treatment could still be provided within the adult system. Liegeois ultimately focused on how long juvenile jurisdiction could provide the treatment discussed at the hearing. He said the roughly five-year treatment period available through the juvenile option was inadequate when considered alongside the seriousness of the alleged offense and Waupoose’s needs. Van Rybroek had indicated that those needs could continue longer. The judge therefore concluded that the defense had not met the standard necessary to move the prosecution.
The jurisdiction hearing came only after the case had survived a separate competency issue. Soon after Waupoose was charged in August 2025, defense counsel questioned whether he was competent to proceed. An examiner initially found that he was not, and the court ordered an updated report suited to the adult-court setting. The prosecution paused while competency was addressed. By March 2026, a later evaluation found Waupoose competent, allowing the proceedings to resume. Competency is a legal assessment of a defendant’s ability to understand the case and assist counsel; it neither proves nor disproves the criminal allegations.
Waupoose was subsequently ordered to stand trial after a preliminary hearing. His attorneys announced the reverse-waiver effort, and another procedural issue developed when he turned 17 on May 2. Because Wisconsin generally prosecutes 17-year-olds as adults, the timing raised questions about whether a transfer remained possible. Liegeois allowed the reverse-waiver process to go forward because Waupoose had been younger when the alleged crime occurred and some juvenile programs could still have been available. The ruling ensured the defense received a hearing on treatment and jurisdiction rather than losing the request solely because Waupoose had another birthday while the case was pending.
By denying the transfer, Liegeois left the state’s allegations to be tested in the adult criminal process. That decision carries consequences for how the case can be handled, but it should not be confused with a verdict. The complaint’s descriptions of the pruning shears, phone communications and events inside the home remain accusations. The judge’s task at the reverse-waiver hearing was to determine jurisdiction under Wisconsin law, not to decide beyond a reasonable doubt whether Waupoose intended to kill his mother or committed the charged offenses.
Following the September ruling, Waupoose was scheduled to return for a status conference on Oct. 27. The sources reviewed through Nov. 6 did not identify a later public report establishing a conviction, acquittal, plea or other final resolution. The adult-court ruling therefore remains the latest clearly verified material development in the reporting reviewed here, with Waupoose presumed innocent as the prosecution continues.
Author note: Last updated Nov. 6, 2026.