C.W., PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
C.W. petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his involuntary psychiatric commitment at Halifax Health Medical Center under Florida's Baker Act. The circuit court denied the petition, but the appellate court granted it after the State conceded error, finding insufficient clear and convincing evidence that C.W. was a danger to himself or others to justify continued involuntary confinement.
The court granted C.W.'s petition for writ of habeas corpus and ordered his immediate release, concluding that the record did not contain clear and convincing evidence meeting the statutory criteria for continued involuntary commitment under section 394.467(1)(a), Florida Statutes.
[1] A circuit court order for involuntary inpatient placement requires clear and convincing evidence that the individual is a danger to themselves or others.
[2] A petition for writ of habeas corpus is the proper procedural vehicle to challenge the legality of involuntary confinement.
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 record does not contain clear and convincing evidence that he is a danger to himself or others”
Establishes the statutory standard C.W. must meet and what was lacking in the record to justify continued 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 intelligenceC.W. was admitted for involuntary examination under the Baker Act on February 11, 2017. On February 17, 2017, the circuit court determined he met crit…
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 Clear And Convincing Evidence Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
C.W. petitions for a writ of habeas corpus for his release from his involuntary confinement at the Halifax Health Medical Center (“Medical Center”) in Daytona Beach, Florida. C.W. was admitted to the Medical Center for involuntary examination under the Baker Act1 on February 11, 2017. At a hearing held on February 17, 2017, the circuit court determined that C.W. met the criteria for involuntary commitment and issued an order for involuntary inpatient placement at the Medical Center under section 894.467(1), Florida Statutes (2016).
On March 28, 2017, Appellant petitioned the circuit court for a writ of habeas corpus.2 The circuit court held a hearing on the petition on March 80, 2017. The circuit court heard testimony from C.W.’s doctor, Dr. Chaiffetz, that C.W. would benefit from “extended stabilization” and that there was a risk of “decompensation” without the structured environment of the Medical Center. Dr. Chaiffetz noted that C.W. had been released previously only to relapse and be readmitted a short time later. The circuit court denied the petition stating that it believed involuntary placement in the Medical Center was “a lifeboat” for C.W. The circuit court explained that C.W. needed to “stay in this lifeboat a little bit longer” and that the court was “trying desperately to get [C.W.] to do that.”
C.W. contends that he is entitled to immediate release because the record does not contain clear and convincing evidence that he is a danger to himself or others. The State properly concedes error and agrees that the writ of habeas corpus should be granted. Accordingly, we grant C.W.’s petition for writ of habeas corpus and order his immediate release. See § 394.467(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2016); In re Lehrke, 12 So.3d 307, 308-09 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (citing Blue v. State, 764 So.2d 697, 698 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)). No motion for rehearing will be entertained.
PETITION GRANTED.
PALMER, BERGER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
J.F. v. State, 232 So. 3d 1182 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)…a danger to himself or others. The State properly concedes error and agrees that the wiit of habeas corpus should be granted. Accordingly, we grant the petition and order his immediate release. See § 394.467(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2017); C.W. v. State, 214 So. 3d 796, 797 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017) (citing In re Lehrke, 12 So. 3d 307, 308-09 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)). No motion for rehearing will be entertained. PETITION GRANTED. PALMER, BERGER and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.…
-
L.G. v. State, 244 So. 3d 418 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)…s a danger to himself or others. The State properly concedes error and agrees that this court should grant the writ of habeas corpus. Accordingly, we grant L.G.'s petition for writ of habeas corpus and order his immediate release. See C.W. v. State, 214 So. 3d 796, 797 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017) (granting habeas corpus petition where trial court involuntarily committed petitioner without clear and convincing evidence that he was a danger to himself or others) (citing § 394.467(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2016) ; In re Lehrke…
Authorities Cited
- Blue v. State, 764 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- In re Involuntary Placement of Michael Lehrke: Michael Lehrke v. State, 12 So. 3d 307 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)
- Fleming v. State, 12 So. 3d 307 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)