Matter of Perkins

WHICHARD, Judge.

Respondent contends that because the evidence was insufficient to support the finding that he “is imminently dangerous to himself or others,” the court erred in denying his motions to dismiss. We disagree.

The involuntary commitment statute, G.S. 122-58.1 to .27 (1981 & Supp. 1981), required as a condition to a valid commitment order that the court find, by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence, two distinct facts: first, that respondent was mentally ill or inebriate, as those words are defined in G.S. 122-36; and second, that respondent was dangerous to himself or others.…