Civil commitment laws shifting across states
While Indiana justices recently stressed the great public importance of proper adjudication of soaring mental health filings, states across the country are dealing with rising caseloads in no uniform way.
While Indiana justices recently stressed the great public importance of proper adjudication of soaring mental health filings, states across the country are dealing with rising caseloads in no uniform way.
Indiana Supreme Court justices split over whether to grant transfer in two civil commitment order cases last week but granted transfer in two similar cases in a per curiam opinion that disapproved of a Marion County judge’s practice of permitting a presiding commissioner to sign the orders in his place.
For the second time in little more than one month, the Indiana Court of Appeals has addressed the issue of the Marion Superior Court ordering civil commitments by the judge summarily approving commitment orders signed by commissioners or magistrates without signing the orders. But unlike a prior ruling, the COA on Wednesday found that issue waived, though a dissenting judge argued litigants cannot waive the issue of a judge’s failure to perform a statutory duty.
The Indiana Court of Appeals will hear argument next week in a case involving an involuntary mental health commitment that was not signed by the presiding judge.
The Marion County probate judge’s method of opening new cases to approve all of the mental health civil commitment recommendations of magistrate judges and commissioners during a given period of time was rejected Thursday by the Indiana Court of Appeals.
A man whose attorney waived his right to be present at his mental health civil commitment hearing will be released from involuntary commitment after the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that attorneys may not waive a client’s right to be present at those hearings. The court also found that trial courts can independently waive a respondent’s presence but must do so at the beginning of a civil commitment proceeding.
Indiana Court of Appeals Judge Paul Mathias again used an opinion to highlight problems he sees in the criminal justice system when dealing with defendants with mental health issues.
Faults in the state’s mental health system can’t be used to justify an insanity defense being rejected in favor of a different sentence that will keep a person locked up, an Indiana Supreme Court majority ruled.