WILLIAM HENRY WHEALTON, APPELLANT,
v.
ISAAC E. WHEALTON, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1966-03-18
No. 5763
SHANNON, Acting C. J., HOBSON, J., and HEWITT, ROBERT S., Associate Judge, concur.
184 So. 2d 228 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1966) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that an ambiguity in statutes governing competency hearings should be resolved in favor of the alleged incompetent.


Facts & Procedural History

An examining committee found the appellant incompetent due to schizophrenia. The appellant was not allowed to examine the physician's report used by t…

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.

Appellant, William Henry Whealton, brings this appeal from a County Judge’s order adjudging him an incompetent.

After a petition signed by Isaac E. Whealton was filed initiating the hearing, an examining committee was appointed to determine Appellant’s competency. The committee examined Appellant and reported that “ * * * he is incompetent, the apparent cause being Schizophrenic Reaction, Paranoid Type, chronic, severe.” After their determination Appellant was taken into custody and examined by the court at the hearing.

Appellant contends that the court erred in not allowing him to examine the physician’s report which was used by the court in determining the question of competency.

Section 394.22(4), F.S.A., provides that “[t]he court shall receive all relevant and material evidence which may be offered and shall not be bound by the rules of evidence.” In Section 394.22(9), F.S.A., it is provided that the judge shall make his determination as to the competency based upon the report of the examining committee and the hearing.

We are of the view that an ambiguity exists between the two sections of Florida Statute, Chapter 394, as set out above, and *229•that such ambiguity should be resolved in favor of the alleged incompetent by reason lof the nature of the incompetency proceedings. The order of the County Judge adjudicating the appellant incompetent is .hereby reversed and this cause is remanded to the lower court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

SHANNON, Acting C. J., HOBSON, J., and HEWITT, ROBERT S., Associate Judge, concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Sullivan v. State, 352 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
    …ncies as designated by the patient, his guardian, or his attorney. . . . ” (Emphasis supplied) Any ambiguity in the statute as to whether the report should be released to the patient should be resolved in favor of the patient. Whealton v. Whealton, 184 So. 2d 228 (Fla.2d DCA 1966). The legislature, in its wisdom, placed with the patient the right to designate the person and agencies named in the section who may have access to his record. It would follow that, in order to properly exercise that right, the leg…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw