(a) The State shall appear and be represented by the State’s Attorney for the county in
which the hearing takes place or by the Attorney General at his or her discretion.
(b) The State shall have the burden of proving its case by clear and convincing evidence.
(c) The Attorney for the State shall have the authority to dismiss the application at
any stage of the proceeding. (Added 1977, No. 252 (Adj. Sess.), § 23.)
In re E.T., 2004 VT 111 (Vt. 2004). · cites it 2דfactors, we instead review the court’s findings based on all the evidence presented at the hearing.”
In re N.H., 724 A.2d 467 (Vt. 1998). · cites it 2דcontends the Department failed to present clear and convincing evidence that she was a patient in need of further treatment, as required by 18 V.S.A. § 7616(b). We affirm. * The material facts as found by the trial court are largely undisputed.”
In re W. H., 481 A.2d 22 (Vt. 1984). “Under 18 V.S.A. §§ 7616 and 7617, a person may be involuntarily committed only upon a finding, by clear and convincing evidence, that he or she “is suffering from mental illness and .”
In re R.L., 657 A.2d 180 (Vt. 1995). “) The family court may enter an involuntary treatment order if it finds that, at the time of the petition and the hearing, the proposed patient suffers from a mental illness and, as a result of that illness, poses a danger of harm to himself or others. 18 V.”
In re G. K., 514 A.2d 1031 (Vt. 1986). “18 V.S.A. § 7616(b). The constitutionality of this initial commitment process is beyond dispute.”
State v. McCarty, 892 A.2d 250 (Vt. 2006). “Cotton during her examination could not be used to support a hospitalization order. We reject both arguments and affirm the hospitalization order.”
In re L. R., 497 A.2d 753 (Vt. 1985). “18 V.S.A. §§ 7616(b), 7617(b). The evidence adduced at the hearing in May of 1984 disclosed that L.”
State v. Zorn, 2013 VT 65 (Vt. 2013). “A “person in need of treatment” is defined in § 7101(17) as: [A] person who is suffering from mental illness and, as a result of that mental illness, his or her capacity to exercise self-control, judgment, or discretion in the conduct of his or her affairs and social relations…”
Goodemote v. Scripture, 440 A.2d 150 (Vt. 1981). “18 V.S.A. § 7616(b); Addington v. Texas, 441 U.”
State v. Zorn, 195 Vt. 381 (Vt. 2013). “A “person in need of treatment” is defined in § 7101(17) as: [A] person who is suffering from mental illness and, as a result of that mental illness , his or her capacity to exercise self-control, judgment, or discretion in the conduct of his or her affairs and social relations…”
In re T.C., 182 Vt. 467 (Vt. 2007). “18 V.S.A. § 7616(b). As we noted in N.H., “[g]iven the significant deprivation of liberty that results from an order of continued treatment, the clear-and-convincing evidence standard should operate as a fundamental caution upon the minds of all judges, barring such orders…”
In Re Et, 2004 VT 111 (Vt. 2004). · cites it 2דfactors, we instead review the court's findings based on all the evidence presented at the hearing.”
In re E.T., 2004 VT 111 (Vt. 2004). “factors, we instead review the court’s findings based on all the evidence presented at the hearing.”
In re N.H., 724 A.2d 467 (Vt. 1998). “contends the Department failed to present clear and convincing evidence that she was a patient in need of further treatment, as required by 18 V.S.A. § 7616(b). We affirm. * The material facts as found by the trial court are largely undisputed.”
In re R.L., 657 A.2d 180 (Vt. 1995). “) The family court may enter an involuntary treatment order if it finds that, at the time of the petition and the hearing, the proposed patient suffers from a mental illness and, as a result of that illness, poses a danger of harm to himself or others. 18 V.”
In re G. K., 514 A.2d 1031 (Vt. 1986). “18 V.S.A. § 7616(b). The constitutionality of this initial commitment process is beyond dispute.”
State v. McCarty, 892 A.2d 250 (Vt. 2006). “Cotton during her examination could not be used to support a hospitalization order. We reject both arguments and affirm the hospitalization order.”
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.