EZEKIEL REGISTER, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed an involuntary commitment order because the trial court failed to conduct proper inquiry into whether the patient's waiver of presence at the commitment hearing was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.
A patient's waiver of the right to be present at an involuntary commitment hearing must be preceded by the court's certification through proper inquiry that the waiver is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.
[1] A denial of the due process right to be present at an involuntary commitment hearing constitutes fundamental error that may be raised on appeal even if not preserved at t…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“A patient has a fundamental right to be present at a commitment proceeding.”
Establishing the foundational right at issue in the case, citing Joehnk v. State.
Ezekiel Register was ordered for involuntary inpatient placement under Florida Statutes section 394.467. His counsel waived his presence at the commit…
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 Right To Be Present cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant, Ezekiel Register, appeals an order of involuntary inpatient placement under section 394.467, Florida Statutes (2006). The appellant argues, among other things, that counsel’s waiver of the appellant’s presence at the commitment hearing was insufficient to allow the hearing to proceed. The state asserts that this issue was not preserved for review.
A patient has a .fundamental right to be present at a commitment proceeding. Joehnk v. State, 689 So. 2d 1179, 1180 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). While a patient may waive his or her right to be personally present and be constructively present through counsel, a court must certify through proper inquiry that the waiver is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. Id. Furthermore, a denial of the due process right to be present at an involuntary commitment hearing is fundamental error which may be raised on appeal even if not preserved below. See Ibur v. State, 765 So. 2d 275, 276 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (holding that a denial of the due process right to be heard prior to the deprivation of one’s liberty is fundamental error).
Because the court below did not certify through proper inquiry that the waiver was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, we reverse and remand for a new commitment hearing.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
BROWNING, C.J., DAVIS, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brown v. State, 953 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)…ant to Godwin v. State, 593 So. 2d 211 (Fla.1992). Further, we agree with the appellant on the merits and therefore remand for a new commitment hearing. A patient has a fundamental right to be present at a commitment proceeding. Register v. State, 946 So. 2d 50, 50 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Joehnk v. State, 689 So. 2d 1179, 1180 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). [*689] A patient may waive his or her right to be personally present, but a court must certify through proper inquiry that the waiver is knowing, intelligent, and v…
-
Mouliom v. Ne. Fla. State Hosp., 128 So. 3d 979 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)…cluded from considering the issue raised in this appeal because “a denial of the due process right to be present at an involuntary commitment hearing is fundamental error which may be raised on appeal even if not preserved below.” Register v. State, 946 So. 2d 50, 50-51 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). We review this issue under the de novo standard of review. See Croom v. State, 36 So. 3d 707, 709 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (“This Court reviews a defendant’s unpreserved claim that a trial court committed fundamental error de…
-
Brown v. State, 956 So. 2d 1269 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)…ent placement under sec [*1270] tion 394.467, Florida Statutes. Appellant argues that appellant’s alleged waiver of her presence at the commitment hearing was insufficient and the state correctly concedes that the point has merit. Register v. State, 946 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Brown v. State, 953 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). The commitment order is reversed and we remand for a new commitment hearing. REVERSED and REMANDED. VAN NORTWICK, LEWIS, and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ibur v. State, 765 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Joehnk v. State, 689 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)