Legal Opinion
In re Miller
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided February 26, 1992No. 91-154PublishedCited by 79 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtAlice Robie Resnick, J.
This case presents two principal issues for our review: (1) Were appellant’s due-process rights adequately protected in the *101course of his involuntary commitment? and (2) Should appellant’s treating psychiatrist have been allowed to testify at the commitment hearing? For the reasons which follow, we answer each question in the negative and reverse the judgment of the court of appeals.
I
When a person faces commitment to a mental hospital against his or her will, the individual’s right against involuntary confinement depriving him or her of liberty must be balanced against the state’s interest in…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Addington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Weis v. WeisOhio Supreme Court · 1947
- State v. SmorgalaOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- Hall China Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1977
- In re BurtonOhio Supreme Court · 1984
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by79 opinions
- State v. HancockOhio Supreme Court · 2006
- Mixon v. OhioCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
- Tanya Mixon, Denise Thomas, and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. The State of Ohio and Michael White, Mayor of the City of ClevelandCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
- State v. TaltyOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- Risner v. Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources, Ohio Div. of Wildlife (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2015
74 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.