SHIRLEY GODWIN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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 court held that an appellant must demonstrate collateral legal consequences from an involuntary commitment to avoid dismissal of an appeal as moot after release.
Appellant sought review of an involuntary commitment order, but was released before the appeal was decided. The appellee moved to dismiss the appeal a…
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 Collateral Legal Consequences cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Shirley Godwin seeks review of a circuit court order involuntarily committing her to a state mental health facility, arguing that clear and convincing evidence was not presented that would justify the action. Appellee now moves to dismiss this appeal as moot, showing that appellant has been released from her commitment. In opposition to dismissal, appellant argues that “a myriad of consequences exist in our society as a result of a commitment to a mental health facility — even subsequent to release.” She gives as an example difficulties in explaining a gap in her employment history to prospective employers.
We conclude appellee’s motion to dismiss should be granted. In Westlake v. State, 440 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), it was held that to avoid dismissal in similar circumstances, appellant must at least demonstrate collateral legal consequences from her involuntary commitment. Accord, Taylor v. State, 536 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Here, appellant relies on potentialities that do not appear to be legal in nature. Accordingly, we grant appellee’s motion and this appeal is dismissed as moot. In so doing, however, we express reservations in applying the mootness doctrine to this case and certify the following question to be one of great public importance:
WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL SEEKING REVIEW OF AN ORDER OF INVOLUNTARY COMMITMENT HAS BEEN RELEASED FROM THAT COMMITMENT PRIOR TO DISPOSITION OF THE APPEAL ON THE MERITS, WHAT SHOWING MUST SHE MAKE TO AVOID DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL ON GROUNDS OF MOOTNESS? APPEAL DISMISSED.
ERVIN, WENTWORTH and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Godwin v. State, 593 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 1992)…HARDING, Judge. We have for plenary review Godwin v. State, 557 So. 2d 955, 956 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), which certified the following question of great public importance: WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL SEEKING REVIEW OF AN ORDER OF INVOLUNTARY COMMITMENT HAS BEEN RELEASED FROM THAT COMMITMENT PRIOR TO DISPOSITION OF THE APPEAL ON THE ME…
-
Swida v. State, 589 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…PER CURIAM. As appellant has been released from her involuntary commitment, we dismiss this appeal as moot pursuant to Godwin v. State, 557 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). As in Godwin, we certify the following question to be one of great public importance: WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL SEEKING REVIEW OF AN ORDER OF INVOLUNTARY COMMITMENT HAS BEEN RELEASED FROM THAT COMMITMENT PRIOR TO DISPOSITION OF THE A…
Authorities Cited
- Westlake v. State, 440 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Moore v. State, 536 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- Taylor v. State, 536 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)