MICHAEL D. BRADEN, 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.
Michael Braden appealed an involuntary commitment order, and the Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed, finding insufficient evidence that Braden posed a real and substantial threat of harm to himself or others. The court held that the mere need for psychiatric treatment is insufficient to justify involuntary commitment absent a showing of dangerousness.
The involuntary commitment order was reversed because the evidence was insufficient to establish that Braden posed a real and substantial threat of harm to himself or others. The court held that even if other criteria for involuntary placement are met, a non-dangerous individual capable of surviving safely in freedom should never be involuntarily committed, and the mere need for treatment alone is insufficient.
[1] Involuntary commitment requires evidence that the individual poses a real and present threat of substantial harm to himself or others.
[2] The mere need for treatment alone is insufficient to support an order for involuntary commitment.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“To support a finding of involuntary placement, the evidence must establish that appellant posed a real and present threat of substantial harm to himself or others.”
Establishes the legal standard required for involuntary commitment
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBraden was found to be verbally and physically aggressive towards others at times, unpredictable, and in need of a structured environment with supervi…
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 Involuntary Commitment cases and more on FLexlaw
CAWTHON, Senior Judge.
Appellant seeks reversal of an order for involuntary commitment. We reverse the order based on the insufficiency of evidence that appellant posed a real and substantial threat of harm to himself or others. To support a finding of involuntary placement, the evidence must establish that appellant posed a real and present threat of substantial harm to himself or others. Welk v. State, 542 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). Even if the other criteria for involuntary placement are met, a non-dangerous individual, capable of surviving safely in freedom by himself or with the help of others, should never be involuntarily committed. In re Beverly, 342 So. 2d 481 (Fla.1977); Williams v. State, 522 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). The mere need for treatment alone is insufficient to commit an individual. Williams; Neff v. State, 356 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).
The experts in the instant case, like the experts in Welk v. State, found the appellant at times verbally and physically aggressive towards others, unpredictable, and in need of a structured environment with supervision. However, just as the experts in Welk, the instant experts did not identify the serious nature of the injury that appellant would sustain if not incarcerated, and did not present any testimony of serious injuries as a result of past episodes. In the instant case, both appellant’s psychologist and psychiatrist recommended that appellant be put in a voluntary residence program. They both testified that appellant did not need to be involuntarily placed in the state hospital. Appellant’s history likewise establishes that appellant can survive safely outside of involuntary placement and will not be a threat to himself or others. Accordingly, the order of involuntary placement is reversed.
JOANOS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lyon v. State, 724 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)…a Baker Act commitment.” Adams v. State, 713 So. 2d 1063, 1063 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). See also In re Beverly, 342 So. 2d at 481; Archer v. State, 681 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Jones v. State, 611 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Braden v. State, 575 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Welk v. State, 542 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Williams v. State, 522 So. 2d at 983; Smith v. State, 508 So. 2d 1292 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Neff v. State, 356 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Reversed. BENTON, VAN NORTWICK,…
-
Jones v. State, 611 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…sively on a few occasions, and threatened harm to his son-in-law. “To support a finding of involuntary placement, the evidence must establish that appellant posed a real and present threat of substantial harm to himself or others.” Braden v. State, 575 So. 2d 756, 757 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), citing Welk v. State, 542 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). In Braden and Welk, as in the instant case, the experts found the appellant “at times verbally and physically aggressive towards others, unpredictable, and in need…
-
Singletary v. State, 765 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…ut in section 394.467, Florida Statutes (1999), by clear and convincing evidence. See In re Beverly, 342 So. 2d 481 (Fla.1977); Archer v. State, 681 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Jones v. State, 611 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Braden v. State, 575 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Welk v. State, 542 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Williams v. State, 522 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Smith v. State, 508 So. 2d 1292 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Neff v. State, 356 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). The evidence at…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- In re Preer Beverly, 342 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 1977)
- Williams v. State, 522 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- Welk v. State, 542 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- State v. Wardlow, 356 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)
- Neff v. State, 356 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)