M.R.,
v.
EVOLUTIONS TREATMENT CENTER,
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appellate court granted a writ of habeas corpus, vacating an order for involuntary treatment. The court found that the order was improperly entered because the required assessment had not been completed within the statutory timeframe.
The appellate court held that the trial court's order for involuntary treatment was improper. The court granted the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and vacated the order because the statutory requirements for assessment were not met.
[1] A court order for involuntary assessment under the Marchman Act must specify that a qualified professional conduct the assessment and file a report of findings and recomm…
[2] A petition for involuntary treatment services under the Marchman Act may not proceed if the required treatment assessment has not been completed.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The involuntary assessment order required the Center to assess M.R. within 72 hours by a “qualified professional who shall file a report of findings and recommendations” with the circuit court within seven days.”
Establishes the procedural requirement for involuntary assessment under the Marchman Act.
Previewing 1 of 4 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceM.R. was voluntarily admitted to Evolutions Treatment Center for substance abuse. M.R.'s family petitioned for involuntary commitment under the Marchm…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Marchman Act cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
According to the amended emergency petition for a writ of habeas corpus and appendix filed here, M.R. is a 23-year-old presently subject to an involuntary commitment at Evolutions Treatment Center (“Center”) under the Marchman Act, section 397.301 et seq., Florida Statutes (2019).
M.R.’s initial admission was voluntary, on April 6, 2020. After the Center completed an initial psychiatric evaluation of M.R. the following day, petitioning family members sought to convert the admission to an involuntary commitment for M.R.’s further assessment and stabilization at the Center in an emergency petition filed in the circuit court, pursuant to section 397.6818 of the Marchman Act. The emergency petition alleged that M.R. has been substance abuse impaired and has had a co-occurring mental disorder for the past two years.
On April 9, 2020, the circuit court entered an ex parte order for involuntary assessment for substance abuse, detoxification, and stabilization. The involuntary assessment order required the Center to assess M.R. within 72 hours by a “qualified professional who shall file a report of findings and recommendations” with the circuit court within seven days. Those time periods began to run when M.R. was served with the involuntary assessment order.
On April 10, 2020, M.R.’s family members filed a sworn petition for involuntary treatment services for M.R., for a period of up to 90 days. That petition did not allege that the treatment assessment ordered by the trial court had been completed. A notice of hearing to address the involuntary treatment petition was filed on April 14, setting a hearing on the petition for April 20, 2020. An attorney from the Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel for this region was appointed to represent the interests of M.R. The case was heard by the trial court on April 23, 2020, via videoconferencing due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
The trial court heard the testimony of a petitioning family member, the clinical director and a therapist from the Center, and M.R. himself. Four days later, the trial court entered an order granting the petition and directing M.R. to remain in the custody of the Center for up to ninety days of further treatment. Regional Counsel’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus and immediate discharge from involuntary commitment, and an appendix, were filed here on May 20, 2020. An amended petition and appendix, filed two days later, designated the Center as the appropriate respondent (rather than the State of Florida).
These documents were certified to have been served by email on the attorney for the petitioning family members and on the Center. We ordered a response to be filed on May 28, 2020, but one was not forthcoming. The Clerk’s office contacted counsel for the petitioning family members and the clinical director of the Center to inquire whether a response would be filed and was advised that it would not.
Accordingly, we grant the amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus and direct the Center to discharge M.R. and to release him from involuntary custody forthwith.1 We vacate the trial court’s order of April 27, 2020, for involuntary treatment for substance services. This opinion shall take effect immediately upon issuance. Petition granted; order for involuntary treatment vacated.