Legal Opinion

In re MH 2007-001275

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided April 8, 2008No. 1 CA-MH 07-0023PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

KESSLER, Presiding Judge.

¶ 1 Appellant, G.M., appeals the decision of the superior court finding him persistently or acutely disabled and ordering a combined program of inpatient and outpatient treatment. Appellant argues that he was denied his due process rights to a formal, contested hearing as required by Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 36-539 (2003) when the superior court failed to make express findings that the waiver of his rights at such a hearing was voluntary, knowing and intelligent. We hold that, similar to a waiver of the right to be present at such a hearing…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Parham v. J. R.Supreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Evenstad v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1993
  3. In Re Maricopa County Superior Court Number MH 2001-001139Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
  4. In re MH 2006-000749Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  5. In Re Jesse M.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2007

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. In Re Mh2010-002637Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2011
  2. In re MH 2008-001752Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  3. In re MH 2009-001264Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
  4. In Re Mh 2008-002393Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  5. In Re Mh Xxxx-XxxxxxCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2008

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API