Legal Opinion
In Re Mh2010-002637
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided September 27, 2011No. 1 CA-MH 11-0011PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KESSLER, Judge.
¶ 1 In this appeal from the trial court’s order involuntarily committing Appellant, we are asked to decide two issues. First, when the patient is absent from the evidentiary hearing required by Arizona Revised Statutes (“AR.S.”) section 36-539(C) (Supp. 2010), may the court proceed with that hearing without first finding that the patient can not appear through any other means? 1 Second, does a person facing civil commitment have the right to effective assistance of counsel, and if so, how is a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel to be resolved? On this record, we…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. CronicSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Addington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Vitek v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State of Arizona v. Vaughn Miles DenzCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2013
- In Re Katherine NCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2018
- In Re Mh 2014-003019Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
- In Re Mh2015-002490Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2018
- In Re Mh2020-004756Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2021
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.