L.G., PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT.

Fla. 5th DCA | 2018-05-31
No. Case No. 5D18–1718
Evander, J., Wallis, J., Edwards, J.
244 So. 3d 418 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2018)

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.

Synopsis

The court granted L.G.'s habeas corpus petition and ordered his immediate release from involuntary psychiatric confinement because the trial court lacked clear and convincing evidence that he was a danger to himself or others as required by the Baker Act.


Holding

A trial court cannot order involuntary psychiatric confinement under the Baker Act without clear and convincing evidence that the person is a danger to himself or others.


Headnotes

[1] Involuntary psychiatric confinement under the Baker Act requires clear and convincing evidence that the person is a danger to himself or others; testimony that a person w…

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

Facts & Procedural History

L.G. was admitted to Halifax Health Medical Center in May 2018 pursuant to the Baker Act for involuntary examination. At a Baker Act hearing on May 24…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

*419L.G. 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. In May 2018, pursuant to the Baker Act,1 L.G. was admitted to the Medical Center for involuntary examination. On May 24, 2018, the trial court held a Baker Act hearing. After hearing the treating physician's testimony that L.G. would benefit from ongoing care, the trial court ordered L.G. to remain in the Medical Center for four weeks under a continuance, over L.G.'s objection.

L.G. asserts 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 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, 12 So.3d 307, 308-09 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) ). No motion for rehearing will be entertained.

PETITION GRANTED.

EVANDER, WALLIS and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw