§ 7625. Hearing on application for involuntary medication; burden of proof
(a) Unless consolidated with an application for involuntary treatment pursuant to subdivision
7624(b)(2) or (b)(4) of this title, a hearing on an application for involuntary medication
shall be held within seven days after filing and shall be conducted in accordance
with sections 7613, 7614, and 7616 and subsections 7615(b)–(e) of this title.
(b) In a hearing conducted pursuant to this section, section 7626, or section 7627 of this title, the Commissioner has the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence.
(c) In determining whether or not the person is competent to make a decision regarding
the proposed treatment, the court shall consider whether the person is able to make
a decision and appreciate the consequences of that decision. (Added 1997, No. 114 (Adj. Sess.), § 4; amended 2013, No. 192 (Adj. Sess.), §§ 13, 25; 2023, No. 6, § 204, eff. July 1, 2023.)
In re L.A., 912 A.2d 977 (Vt. 2006). · cites it 3ד18 V.S.A. § 7625(a). ¶ 3. At the hearing, the Commissioner presented the testimony of Dr.”
J.L. v. Miller, 817 A.2d 1 (Vt. 2002). · cites it 3דConsent Decree provide for the patient to receive representation, as well as an independent psychiatric evaluation, 18 V.S.A § 7625(a); J.L. v. Miller, No. 5-418-84-WnC, at 8 (Vt.”
In re G.G., 2017 VT 10 (Vt. 2017). · cites it 2דSecond, he argues that the court applied an incorrect standard for competency and that under the correct standard, he was competent to make decisions about his course of treatment.”
In re I.G., 2016 VT 95 (Vt. 2016). · cites it 4דPatient argues that the court erred by (1) incorrectly applying the competency standard under 18 V.S.A. § 7625, and (2) failing to address whether a previously prepared document reflecting his desire not to be given psychiatric medication was a “competently expressed written .”
In Re La, 2006 VT 118 (Vt. 2006). · cites it 3ד18 V.S.A. § 7625(a). ¶ 3. At the hearing, the Commissioner presented the testimony of Dr.”
In re L.A., 2007 VT 119 (Vt. 2007). “The State’s argument rests on the faulty premise that the burden of proof specified in 18 V.S.A. § 7625(b) applied only to proceedings under §7626.”
In re J.R. (Vt. 2013). “appeals. Before granting a petition for involuntary medication, 28 V.”
In re B.M. (Vt. 2011). “” 18 V.S.A. § 7625(c). The State has the burden of demonstrating a patient’s incompetence by clear and convincing evidence.”
In Re La, 2007 VT 119 (Vt. 2007). “The State's argument rests on the faulty premise that the burden of proof specified in 18 V.S.A. § 7625(b) applied only to proceedings under § 7626.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 7625(a) — 3 cases
J.L. v. Miller, 817 A.2d 1 (Vt. 2002). “Consent Decree provide for the patient to receive representation, as well as an independent psychiatric evaluation, 18 V.S.A § 7625(a); J.L. v. Miller, No. 5-418-84-WnC, at 8 (Vt.”
In re L.A., 912 A.2d 977 (Vt. 2006). “18 V.S.A. § 7625(a). ¶ 3. At the hearing, the Commissioner presented the testimony of Dr.”
In Re La, 2006 VT 118 (Vt. 2006). “18 V.S.A. § 7625(a). ¶ 3. At the hearing, the Commissioner presented the testimony of Dr.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 7625(b) — 4 cases
In re G.G., 2017 VT 10 (Vt. 2017). “Second, he argues that the court applied an incorrect standard for competency and that under the correct standard, he was competent to make decisions about his course of treatment.”
J.L. v. Miller, 817 A.2d 1 (Vt. 2002). “Consent Decree provide for the patient to receive representation, as well as an independent psychiatric evaluation, 18 V.S.A § 7625(a); J.L. v. Miller, No. 5-418-84-WnC, at 8 (Vt.”
In re L.A., 2007 VT 119 (Vt. 2007). “The State’s argument rests on the faulty premise that the burden of proof specified in 18 V.S.A. § 7625(b) applied only to proceedings under §7626.”
In Re La, 2007 VT 119 (Vt. 2007). “The State's argument rests on the faulty premise that the burden of proof specified in 18 V.S.A. § 7625(b) applied only to proceedings under § 7626.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 7625(c) — 6 cases
In re L.A., 912 A.2d 977 (Vt. 2006). “18 V.S.A. § 7625(a). ¶ 3. At the hearing, the Commissioner presented the testimony of Dr.”
In re G.G., 2017 VT 10 (Vt. 2017). “Second, he argues that the court applied an incorrect standard for competency and that under the correct standard, he was competent to make decisions about his course of treatment.”
In re I.G., 2016 VT 95 (Vt. 2016). “Patient argues that the court erred by (1) incorrectly applying the competency standard under 18 V.S.A. § 7625, and (2) failing to address whether a previously prepared document reflecting his desire not to be given psychiatric medication was a “competently expressed written .”
In Re La, 2006 VT 118 (Vt. 2006). “18 V.S.A. § 7625(a). ¶ 3. At the hearing, the Commissioner presented the testimony of Dr.”
In re J.R. (Vt. 2013). “appeals. Before granting a petition for involuntary medication, 28 V.”
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.