Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 47.30.700 (2026)
Initial involuntary commitment procedures
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 47.30.700. Initial involuntary commitment procedures.
(a) Upon petition of any adult, a judge shall immediately conduct a screening investigation or direct a local mental health professional employed by the department or by a local mental health program that receives money from the department under AS 47.30.520 — 47.30.620 or another mental health professional designated by the judge, to conduct a screening investigation of the person alleged to be mentally ill and, as a result of that condition, alleged to be gravely disabled or to present a likelihood of serious harm to self or others. Within 48 hours after the completion of the screening investigation, a judge may issue an ex parte order orally or in writing, stating that there is probable cause to believe the respondent is mentally ill and that condition causes the respondent to be gravely disabled or to present a likelihood of serious harm to self or others. The court shall provide findings on which the conclusion is based, appoint an attorney to represent the respondent, and may direct that a peace officer take the respondent into custody and deliver the respondent to the nearest appropriate facility for emergency examination or treatment. The ex parte order shall be provided to the respondent and made a part of the respondent's clinical record. The court shall confirm an oral order in writing within 24 hours after it is issued.
(b) The petition required in (a) of this section must allege that the respondent is reasonably believed to present a likelihood of serious harm to self or others or is gravely disabled as a result of mental illness and must specify the factual information on which that belief is based including the names and addresses of all persons known to the petitioner who have knowledge of those facts through personal observation.
(c) When a crisis stabilization center, crisis residential center, evaluation facility, or treatment facility admits a minor respondent under this section, the center or facility shall inform the parent or guardian of the location of the minor as soon as possible after the arrival of the minor at the center or facility. When a crisis stabilization center, crisis residential center, evaluation facility, or treatment facility admits an adult for whom a guardian has been appointed and the center or facility is aware of the appointment, the center or facility shall inform the guardian of the location of the adult as soon as possible after the arrival of the adult at the center or facility.
(d) A peace officer may take a respondent into custody under (a) of this section only if the ex parte order authorizing the peace officer to take the respondent into custody is transmitted to the peace officer through a distribution method that permits the peace officer to verify that the order originated from a court. If the peace officer receives an order through a distribution method that does not permit the peace officer to verify that the order originated from a court, the peace officer shall contact the court and request that the court transmit the order to the peace officer through a suitable distribution method. The court shall immediately comply. A facsimile transmission from a telephone number, or electronic mail from an electronic mail address, known by the peace officer to belong to a court is sufficient to satisfy this subsection.
(a) Upon petition of any adult, a judge shall immediately conduct a screening investigation or direct a local mental health professional employed by the department or by a local mental health program that receives money from the department under AS 47.30.520 — 47.30.620 or another mental health professional designated by the judge, to conduct a screening investigation of the person alleged to be mentally ill and, as a result of that condition, alleged to be gravely disabled or to present a likelihood of serious harm to self or others. Within 48 hours after the completion of the screening investigation, a judge may issue an ex parte order orally or in writing, stating that there is probable cause to believe the respondent is mentally ill and that condition causes the respondent to be gravely disabled or to present a likelihood of serious harm to self or others. The court shall provide findings on which the conclusion is based, appoint an attorney to represent the respondent, and may direct that a peace officer take the respondent into custody and deliver the respondent to the nearest appropriate facility for emergency examination or treatment. The ex parte order shall be provided to the respondent and made a part of the respondent's clinical record. The court shall confirm an oral order in writing within 24 hours after it is issued.
(b) The petition required in (a) of this section must allege that the respondent is reasonably believed to present a likelihood of serious harm to self or others or is gravely disabled as a result of mental illness and must specify the factual information on which that belief is based including the names and addresses of all persons known to the petitioner who have knowledge of those facts through personal observation.
(c) When a crisis stabilization center, crisis residential center, evaluation facility, or treatment facility admits a minor respondent under this section, the center or facility shall inform the parent or guardian of the location of the minor as soon as possible after the arrival of the minor at the center or facility. When a crisis stabilization center, crisis residential center, evaluation facility, or treatment facility admits an adult for whom a guardian has been appointed and the center or facility is aware of the appointment, the center or facility shall inform the guardian of the location of the adult as soon as possible after the arrival of the adult at the center or facility.
(d) A peace officer may take a respondent into custody under (a) of this section only if the ex parte order authorizing the peace officer to take the respondent into custody is transmitted to the peace officer through a distribution method that permits the peace officer to verify that the order originated from a court. If the peace officer receives an order through a distribution method that does not permit the peace officer to verify that the order originated from a court, the peace officer shall contact the court and request that the court transmit the order to the peace officer through a suitable distribution method. The court shall immediately comply. A facsimile transmission from a telephone number, or electronic mail from an electronic mail address, known by the peace officer to belong to a court is sufficient to satisfy this subsection.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 44
cases (18 in the last 5 years), 1989–2024 · leading case: In Re Hospitalization of Paige M., 433 P.3d 1182 (Alaska 2018).
In Re Hospitalization of Paige M., 433 P.3d 1182 (Alaska 2018). “That evening the court issued an order authorizing Paige's hospitalization under AS 47.30.700. The court found that there was probable cause to believe that Paige was mentally ill, that she was likely to cause serious harm to herself, and that she was gravely disabled.”
Native Vill. of Kwinhagak v. State of Alaska, DHSS, OCS, 542 P.3d 1099 (Alaska 2024). “Legal Proceedings On December 22 the Tribe moved for a hearing and expedited consideration under the civil commitment statutes (AS 47.30.700 – 47.30.815). This was the first request for judicial review of Mira’s inpatient psychiatric treatment by any party.”
Greywolf v. Carroll, 151 P.3d 1234 (Alaska 2007). “Carroll discharged her two days later, on November 10, because he determined that she did not meet the standards for involuntary commitment under AS 47.30.700. 1 On November 10, 2000, Greywolf filed a second written complaint against Dr.”
In the Matter of the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Mabel B., In the Matter of the Necessity for the Hospitalization of: Sarah D., 485 P.3d 1018 (Alaska 2021). “2 AS 47.30.700. -2- 7525 respondent to the nearest appropriate facility for emergency examination or treatment.”
In Re the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Stephen O., 314 P.3d 1185 (Alaska 2013). “psychologist licensed by the state Board of Psychologist and Psychological Associate Examiners who has probable cause to believe that a person is gravely disabled or is suffering from mental illness and is likely to cause serious harm to self or others of such immediate nature…”
Heller v. Doe Ex Rel. Doe, 509 U.S. 312 (1993). “1992) (mental illness); Alaska Stat. Ann. § 47.30.700 et seq. (1990) (mental illness); Ariz.”
In Re Necessity for the Hospitalization of Heather R., 366 P.3d 530 (Alaska 2016). “Heather argues that the master violated AS 47.30.700 because he failed to conduct the required screening investigation before he issued the evaluation order.”
Barrett v. State, 772 P.2d 559 (Alaska Ct. App. 1989). “[6] Thus, it seems fair that before the defendant is subjected to the burdens associated with being found not guilty by reason of insanity, without a separate commitment hearing and without the safeguards of AS 47.30.700, the jury must expressly find that the defendant has a…”
Wetherhorn v. Alaska Psychiatric Inst., 156 P.3d 371 (Alaska 2007). “psychologist licensed by the state Board of Psychologist and Psychological Associate Examiners who has probable cause to believe that a person is gravely disabled or is suffering from mental illness and is likely to cause serious harm to self or others of such immediate nature…”
In the Matter of the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Rabi R., 468 P.3d 721 (Alaska 2020). “-12- 7474 Rabi argues that relying on the contents of the petitions violated the rules of evidence and prejudiced him.”
In the Matter of the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Vern H., 486 P.3d 1123 (Alaska 2021). “2 See AS 47.30.700 (permitting any adult to petition for ex parte order for mental health evaluation of individual who is “reasonably believed to present a likelihood of serious harm to self or others or is gravely disabled as a result of mental illness”).”
In the Matter of the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Meredith.B., 462 P.3d 522 (Alaska 2020). “18 Meredith asserts that an interview would have been “reasonably possible” because her whereabouts were not in question: Meredith’s family consistently stated that she rarely, if ever, left a stationary vehicle on her property. She argues that due to the lack of interview…”
— Alaska Stat. § 47.30.700(a) — 23 cases
In the Matter of the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Mabel B., In the Matter of the Necessity for the Hospitalization of: Sarah D., 485 P.3d 1018 (Alaska 2021). “2 AS 47.30.700. -2- 7525 respondent to the nearest appropriate facility for emergency examination or treatment.”
In Re Necessity for the Hospitalization of Heather R., 366 P.3d 530 (Alaska 2016). “Heather argues that the master violated AS 47.30.700 because he failed to conduct the required screening investigation before he issued the evaluation order.”
In Re Hospitalization of Paige M., 433 P.3d 1182 (Alaska 2018). “That evening the court issued an order authorizing Paige's hospitalization under AS 47.30.700. The court found that there was probable cause to believe that Paige was mentally ill, that she was likely to cause serious harm to herself, and that she was gravely disabled.”
Native Vill. of Kwinhagak v. State of Alaska, DHSS, OCS, 542 P.3d 1099 (Alaska 2024). “Legal Proceedings On December 22 the Tribe moved for a hearing and expedited consideration under the civil commitment statutes (AS 47.30.700 – 47.30.815). This was the first request for judicial review of Mira’s inpatient psychiatric treatment by any party.”
In the Matter of the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Rabi R., 468 P.3d 721 (Alaska 2020). “-12- 7474 Rabi argues that relying on the contents of the petitions violated the rules of evidence and prejudiced him.”
— Alaska Stat. § 47.30.700(b) — 3 cases
Greywolf v. Carroll, 151 P.3d 1234 (Alaska 2007). “Carroll discharged her two days later, on November 10, because he determined that she did not meet the standards for involuntary commitment under AS 47.30.700. 1 On November 10, 2000, Greywolf filed a second written complaint against Dr.”
In Re Hospitalization of Paige M., 433 P.3d 1182 (Alaska 2018). “That evening the court issued an order authorizing Paige's hospitalization under AS 47.30.700. The court found that there was probable cause to believe that Paige was mentally ill, that she was likely to cause serious harm to herself, and that she was gravely disabled.”
In the Matter of the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Meredith.B., 462 P.3d 522 (Alaska 2020). “18 Meredith asserts that an interview would have been “reasonably possible” because her whereabouts were not in question: Meredith’s family consistently stated that she rarely, if ever, left a stationary vehicle on her property. She argues that due to the lack of interview…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.