Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Dahl v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided May 28, 2014No. 4D13-1265Published

1ConcurrenceWarner, J.

I concur in the majority opinion concluding that the issue was not preserved. I write to comment on the merits, however. Appellant appealed an order granting a petition for involuntary psychotropic treatment upon a patient pursuant to section 916.107(3)(a), Florida Statutes (2013). He argued in his brief that the state was required to prove that the requirements of section 916.107(2)(d), Florida Statutes, were met. Even if this had been preserved, I would hold that proof of the requirements of that section is not necessary in a statutory proceeding under section 916.107(3)(a).

Appellant was…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Morgan v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012
  2. Chapman v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API