AGENCY FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, PETITIONER,
v.
CEDILIEN FORESTAL, RESPONDENT
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 vacated a commitment order for competency restoration because the trial court cited the wrong statute, no expert opined the defendant was mentally ill, and the record lacked required statutory findings and a hearing transcript.
A commitment order under section 916.802 for incompetency due to mental retardation or autism must be vacated when the trial court cites the wrong statute, no expert testimony supports mental illness, and required statutory findings are absent.
[1] A commitment order for incompetency restoration must be vacated when the trial court cites an inapplicable statute, no expert testimony supports the statutory basis for c…
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 intelligenceCedilien Forestal was committed by trial court to the Agency for Persons with Disabilities for competency restoration training. No experts who evaluat…
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 Adjudication Of Incompetency cases and more on FLexlaw
The Agency for Persons with Disabilities [“Agency”] petitions this Court for a writ of certiorari seeking to quash the order of the trial court which committed Cedilien Forestal [“Forestal”] to the Agency for competency restoration training. The trial court committed Forestal under section 916.18, Florida Statutes, which pertains to defendants who are adjudicated incompetent to proceed due to a mental illness, although none of the experts who evaluated Forestal opined that he was mentally ill. Moreover, persons committed under section 916.13 are committed to the Department of Children and Famihes. We assume, therefore, that the statutory reference is a scrivener’s error, and that the trial court intended to reference section 916.802. This is the statute that authorizes commitment to the Agency for incompetency due to mental retardation or autism. The latter statute, however, contains certain statutory requirements for findings that are lacking, and we do not have a transcript of the competency hearing held on November 27, 2012.1 We accordingly vacate the order and remand for correction and further findings.
Order VACATED and REMANDED.
SAWAYA and EVANDER, JJ., concur.