In re MH 2007-001275
Court of Appeals of Arizona
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
- Parham v. J. R.Supreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Evenstad v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1993
- In Re Maricopa County Superior Court Number MH 2001-001139Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
- In re MH 2006-000749Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
- In Re Jesse M.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- In Re Mh2010-002637Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2011
- In re MH 2008-001752Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
- In re MH 2009-001264Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
- In Re Mh 2008-002393Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
- In Re Mh Xxxx-XxxxxxCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2008
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.