Gregory Juedes has entered both a not guilty plea and a mental disease or defect plea in the 2024 killing.

APPLETON, Wis. — A Wisconsin man accused of shooting his 74-year-old father 15 times and later making unsolicited statements about the killing to police is scheduled to face a jury in February in a case that could unfold in two distinct stages because of his mental disease or defect plea.

Gregory Juedes, 47, is charged with first-degree intentional homicide in the Nov. 24, 2024, death of Daniel Juedes Sr. at an Appleton home. Juedes has pleaded not guilty and not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect, a Wisconsin procedure that first requires jurors to determine whether the state proved the criminal charge. Only if the jury returns a guilty verdict would the same jury move to a second phase addressing whether a qualifying mental condition prevented Juedes from appreciating the wrongfulness of his conduct or conforming his behavior to the law. Local court reporting says a two-week trial is now scheduled to begin Feb. 8, 2027.

The scheduled trial follows nearly two years of court proceedings that included a psychiatric evaluation, discussions over a possible negotiated resolution and several changes to the trial calendar. A psychiatric report addressing the mental disease or defect issue was completed in 2025, although its detailed findings were not publicly disclosed during the hearing covered by local news organizations. By March 2026, attorneys were still discussing whether the case might be resolved without trial. No agreement was reached at that stage. An August trial date was later set and then postponed after a change involving the assigned judge, according to subsequent local reporting.

The criminal case began with a 7:35 a.m. report of a disturbance involving a weapon at a residence in the 1800 block of South Sanders Street. A neighbor told investigators that a white BMW arrived at the property and that a man carrying a handgun got out of the vehicle, approached the house and forced his way through the front door, according to the criminal complaint as described by Law&Crime and local outlets. The witness then heard yelling followed by a rapid series of gunshots from inside the home. The witness estimated hearing 10 to 12 shots over only a few seconds.

Police arriving at the residence found Daniel Juedes Sr. inside a bedroom. Officers and later reporting described the smell of recently fired ammunition in the house and multiple shell casings and bullet damage in the room. An autopsy subsequently identified 15 gunshot wound tracks, according to the criminal complaint. Fourteen spent cartridge casings were recovered from the residence. The complaint describes those findings as part of the evidence supporting the intentional homicide charge, but the prosecution will still have to prove the charge to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

The neighbor’s account also gave investigators an early description of movements outside the house that later became important to the prosecution’s timeline. The witness said the person who entered the home left shortly after the gunfire and drove away in the white BMW. The vehicle then returned to the property for a short period before leaving again. The complaint attributes significance to that return because police say Juedes later made an unsolicited statement describing why he allegedly went back. That statement is among the most direct pieces of evidence prosecutors are expected to have available when the case reaches trial.

Authorities quickly focused on Juedes after learning that Daniel Juedes had another son in addition to a son the neighbor knew lived at the home. Police received a description of the white BMW and its driver, and an officer spotted a matching vehicle minutes later. The officer activated emergency equipment for a traffic stop. According to the complaint, the driver turned on the BMW’s hazard lights as though he intended to stop but instead continued onto the highway, beginning a pursuit that moved away from the Appleton shooting scene toward Kaukauna.

The pursuit ended after an officer used a pursuit intervention maneuver to stop the vehicle. Police said Juedes then ran from the BMW and continued trying to get away on foot. Officers caught him and struggled to bring him under control. The criminal complaint alleges that during that encounter he tried to reach toward a lieutenant’s weapon. Local reporting says officers used a Taser before Juedes was taken into custody. In addition to the homicide charge, prosecutors charged him with fleeing or eluding an officer and resisting or obstructing an officer in connection with the events after he left the house.

Juedes received medical treatment following his arrest, and the ride to the hospital produced statements that prosecutors cited in the complaint. Authorities said the comments were not responses to police questioning. The complaint quotes Juedes as saying that he believed he had struck his father with every round and had fired an additional shot. It also alleges that he said he returned to the residence to check on his father and make sure he was “down for the count.” The statements are allegations contained in charging documents and have not yet been weighed by a trial jury.

Investigators said they recovered a Canik TP9SFx handgun from Juedes’ vehicle after his arrest. The complaint also describes ammunition evidence found inside Daniel Juedes’ home. Those physical items will form part of a broader evidentiary record that could include the neighbor’s observations, police testimony about the pursuit and arrest, forensic findings from the home and autopsy, and evidence concerning Juedes’ statements after he was taken into custody. Public reporting has not established which exhibits or testimony the judge will ultimately allow jurors to hear.

What has remained notably absent from the public charging account is a stated motive. Local reports reviewing the eight-page criminal complaint have repeatedly noted that it does not identify why prosecutors believe the son killed his father. That absence does not prevent the state from pursuing first-degree intentional homicide, but it leaves a significant factual question unanswered in the public record. Prosecutors may introduce additional evidence at trial that was not described in the complaint, while the defense will have an opportunity to contest both the state’s factual narrative and the legal conclusions prosecutors ask jurors to draw.

The mental disease or defect plea adds a separate question from whether Juedes committed the acts alleged by prosecutors. Under the two-stage structure described in court reporting, jurors would first consider guilt in the ordinary criminal phase. If they acquit him, the case would end without a second stage on mental responsibility. If they convict him, the proceedings would move to the second phase. The defense would then seek to establish that a qualifying mental disease or defect affected Juedes in the way required under Wisconsin law. The existence of a psychiatric diagnosis alone would not automatically decide that issue.

If jurors reject the mental disease or defect claim after finding Juedes guilty of first-degree intentional homicide, he would face the criminal penalties attached to that conviction, including the possibility of life imprisonment. If jurors accept the defense in the second phase, the outcome would be different from a conventional acquittal. Local court reporting says Juedes could instead be committed to a secure psychiatric institution under Wisconsin’s procedures. Those alternatives explain why the psychiatric evaluation and the defense plea have remained central to pretrial proceedings even as the state continues to pursue the homicide charge.

Juedes has been held on a $2 million bond that was imposed after he was formally charged in December 2024. At that court appearance, prosecutors relied on the witness account, the pursuit, autopsy findings and the statements attributed to Juedes after his arrest. The court’s decision to set a high bond did not determine whether he committed the homicide. It addressed his status while the case was pending. Juedes retains the presumption of innocence on every criminal charge unless the state proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The February setting is the latest in a series of trial dates. A March 2026 date was first announced early that year. The case was later scheduled for a longer August trial as attorneys prepared for the possibility of the two-stage proceeding. By September, the schedule had moved again. More recent local reporting from WBAY and WTAQ identifies Feb. 8 as the start of the planned two-week trial. That date is more consistent with the court calendar than a separate report listing Feb. 7, which falls on a Sunday. The public record reviewed does not indicate that a verdict or plea agreement has since resolved the case.

Currently, Juedes remains accused of first-degree intentional homicide and the related fleeing and resisting offenses, with the February 2027 trial still the next major publicly reported milestone. The jury will be asked first to decide whether prosecutors proved the charged conduct and, if necessary, later to consider the separate mental disease or defect question. Until those proceedings occur, the allegations in the complaint remain unproven.

Author note: Last updated October 21, 2026.