Wash. Rev. Code » Title 71 · Chapter 71.05

Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360

Rights of involuntarily detained persons

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Notes:

Reviser's note: RCW 71.05.360 was amended by 2020 c 312 s 731 without reference to its repeal by 2020 c 302 s 104. It has been decodified for publication purposes under RCW 1.12.025.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2022 · leading case: State v. Stout
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Stout (2007) wash · cites it 3× “310 states that those facing civil commitment shall be afforded proceedings that “in all respects accord with the constitutional guarantees of due process of law.”
In Re Detention of Stout (2007) wash · cites it 3× “310 states that those facing civil commitment shall be afforded proceedings that "in all respects accord with the constitutional guarantees of due process of law.”
In re the Detention of M.W. (2016) wash · cites it 2× “In addition to the statutory and regulatory basis allowing individuals the right to counsel under the ITA, see RCW 71.05.360(5)(b); WAC 388-865-0566(2), the record in this case also demonstrates that M.”
Seaton v. Mayberg (2010) ca9 · cites it 2× “2d 97, 104 (1976)); Wash. Rev.Code § 71.05.360(9) (2008); In re R.”
In Re Detention of JS (2007) washctapp · cites it 4× “[ [10] ]" RCW 71.05.360(1)(b). This Washington statute thus implies the need for a separate competency determination, mirroring the express requirement in the analogous Illinois statute.”
State v. J.S. (2007) washctapp · cites it 4× “360(11), which requires the court to appoint counsel if the individual “so elects”: Every person involuntarily detained shall immediately be informed of his or her right to a hearing to review the legality of his or her detention and of his or her right to counsel, by the…”
In Re The Detention Of J.m. (2022) washctapp · cites it 14× “The plain language states that an individual has the right to remain silent “[a]t the probable cause hearing.” Former RCW 71.”
In re the Detention of D.W. (2014) wash “” RCW 71.05.360(2). The ITA also repeatedly provides that those involuntarily detained for evaluation, stabilization, and treatment are to be held in certified evaluation and treatment facilities.”
In re the Detention of P.K. (2015) washctapp · cites it 2× “relies on RCW 71.05.360(9), which provides that “[t]he record maker shall not be required to testify in order to introduce medical or psychological records of the detained person so long as the requirements of RCW 5.”
Magney v. Pham (2020) wash “34 RCW [abuse of vulnerable adults] or RCW 71.05.360 (8) and (9) [involuntary treatment act disclosures]; or (e) To any individual if the mental health counselor, independent clinical social worker, or marriage and family therapist licensed under chapter 18.”
Matter of Detention of Js (1994) wash “Although they cite RCW 71.05.360(2), which states that individuals involuntarily detained "shall have the right to adequate care and individualized treatment”, they fail to demonstrate that the care at Western State is not adequate.”
Pierce County Office of Involuntary Commitment v. Western State Hospital (1982) wash “Also, RCW 71.05.360(2) gives all persons detained or committed pursuant to the involuntary treatment act the right to adequate care and individualized treatment.”
Show all 25 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360(1)(a) — 2 cases
In Re The Detention Of J.m. (2022) washctapp “The plain language states that an individual has the right to remain silent “[a]t the probable cause hearing.” Former RCW 71.”
In re Det. of M. W. (2016) wash
— Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360(1)(b) — 1 case
In Re Detention of JS (2007) washctapp “[ [10] ]" RCW 71.05.360(1)(b). This Washington statute thus implies the need for a separate competency determination, mirroring the express requirement in the analogous Illinois statute.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360(11) — 2 cases
In Re Detention of JS (2007) washctapp “[ [10] ]" RCW 71.05.360(1)(b). This Washington statute thus implies the need for a separate competency determination, mirroring the express requirement in the analogous Illinois statute.”
State v. J.S. (2007) washctapp “360(11), which requires the court to appoint counsel if the individual “so elects”: Every person involuntarily detained shall immediately be informed of his or her right to a hearing to review the legality of his or her detention and of his or her right to counsel, by the…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360(2) — 6 cases
In re the Detention of D.W. (2014) wash “” RCW 71.05.360(2). The ITA also repeatedly provides that those involuntarily detained for evaluation, stabilization, and treatment are to be held in certified evaluation and treatment facilities.”
Matter of Detention of Js (1994) wash “Although they cite RCW 71.05.360(2), which states that individuals involuntarily detained "shall have the right to adequate care and individualized treatment”, they fail to demonstrate that the care at Western State is not adequate.”
Pierce County Office of Involuntary Commitment v. Western State Hospital (1982) wash “Also, RCW 71.05.360(2) gives all persons detained or committed pursuant to the involuntary treatment act the right to adequate care and individualized treatment.”
In re C.V. (2018) washctapp
State Of Washington v. C. v. (2018) washctapp
— Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360(5) — 3 cases
State v. Stout (2007) wash “310 states that those facing civil commitment shall be afforded proceedings that “in all respects accord with the constitutional guarantees of due process of law.”
In Re Detention of Stout (2007) wash “310 states that those facing civil commitment shall be afforded proceedings that "in all respects accord with the constitutional guarantees of due process of law.”
In Re The Detention Of: D.s. (2014) washctapp
— Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360(5)(b) — 2 cases
In re the Detention of M.W. (2016) wash “In addition to the statutory and regulatory basis allowing individuals the right to counsel under the ITA, see RCW 71.05.360(5)(b); WAC 388-865-0566(2), the record in this case also demonstrates that M.”
In re Det. of M. W. (2016) wash
— Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360(5)(e) — 1 case
In re Det. of M. W. (2016) wash
— Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360(8) — 2 cases
In Re The Detention Of D.a. v. State Of Washington (2020) washctapp
In Re The Detention Of: J.n. (2017) washctapp
— Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360(8)(c) — 2 cases
State v. Lane (2014) washctapp
In Re The Detention Of: Alberto S. Lane (2014) washctapp
— Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360(8)(d) — 1 case
In Re The Detention Of J.m. (2022) washctapp “The plain language states that an individual has the right to remain silent “[a]t the probable cause hearing.” Former RCW 71.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360(9) — 5 cases
Seaton v. Mayberg (2010) ca9 “2d 97, 104 (1976)); Wash. Rev.Code § 71.05.360(9) (2008); In re R.”
In re the Detention of P.K. (2015) washctapp “relies on RCW 71.05.360(9), which provides that “[t]he record maker shall not be required to testify in order to introduce medical or psychological records of the detained person so long as the requirements of RCW 5.”
State Of Washington, Resp. v. K. H. App. (2014) washctapp
In Re The Detention Of P. K. (2015) washctapp
In Re The Detention Of P. K.13 (2015) washctapp
— Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360(l)(a) — 1 case
In re the Detention of M.W. (2016) wash “In addition to the statutory and regulatory basis allowing individuals the right to counsel under the ITA, see RCW 71.05.360(5)(b); WAC 388-865-0566(2), the record in this case also demonstrates that M.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.360(l)(b) — 1 case
State v. J.S. (2007) washctapp “360(11), which requires the court to appoint counsel if the individual “so elects”: Every person involuntarily detained shall immediately be informed of his or her right to a hearing to review the legality of his or her detention and of his or her right to counsel, by the…”
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.