or therapist-client relationship, regardless of whether it occurs during any treatment, consultation, interview or examination, is guilty of a Class F felony. Consent is not an issue in an action under this subsection. Section 940.22(2). ¶ 9. To obtain a conviction for a violation of Wis. Stat. § 940.22(2), the State must prove three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) that the defendant was or held himself or herself out to be a therapist; (2) that the defendant had intentional sexual contact with a patient or client; and (3) that the sexual contact occurred during an ongoing therapist-patient or therapist-client relationship. State v. Miller, 2002 WI App 197, ¶ 17 n.5, 257 Wis. 2d 124, 650 N.W.2d 850; see also State v. Ambrose, 196 Wis. 2d 768, 777, 540 N.W.2d 208 (Ct. App. 1995) (<HOLDING>). ¶ 10. DeLain contends there was not
holding that the actor and the complainant must be engaged in a professional therapistpatientclient relationship holding that before a duty can be imposed there must be a relationship between the parties and the harm must have been foreseeable holding that the special relationship exception does not apply to the relationship between a student and a school holding the state must prove that at the time of the homicide the defendant was engaged in the commission of the felony recognizing limited thirdparty rights in the context of an attorneyclient professional relationship where the plaintiff was the intended beneficiary of the prevailing standard of care