makes error in District of Columbia

2017See Henson v. United States, 122 A.3d 899, 902 (D.C. 2015) (“[Wjhere a trial court makes an error of law, it infects the exercise of discretion.”). 13 It is also possible that the trial court thought that Mr. Cruz’s failure to participate in the treatment recommended by PSA, combined with Mr. Cruz’s possible tardiness 14 in applying for relief under § 24-607(b) and the nature of the offense with which he was charged, weighed against granting treatment in lieu of punishment.

2017See Henson v. United States, 122 A.3d 899, 902 (D.C. 2015) (―[W]here a trial court makes an error of law, it infects the exercise of discretion.‖).13 It is also possible that the trial court thought that Mr. Cruz‘s failure to 13 Even though outpatient commitment is permissible under D.C.

1972It has been construed by this court to mean that the Domestic Relations Branch can “adjudicate the respective rights of the parties in any or all property to which one or the other makes claim.” Posnick v. Posnick, D.C.Mun.App., 160 A.2d 804, 807 (1960).

1970We have held that this Section permits the court hearing a divorce action “to adjudicate the respective rights of the parties in any or all property to which one or the other makes claim.” Posnick v. Posnick, D.C.Mun.App., 160 A.2d 804, 807 (1960) (emphasis added).

2015Ford v. Chartone, Inc., 908 A.2d 72, 84 (D.C.2006).

2014Fortune v. United States, 65 A.3d 75, 86 (D.C.2013); Epperson, 495 A.2d at 1176 .

1972See also Dickason v. Dickason, D.C.App., 263 A.2d 640 (1970). 3 .