Matter of C.R.
289 P.3d 125
Mont.2012Background
- Petition for involuntary commitment of 30-year-old C.R. filed after acute behavioral concerns and police transport to Billings Clinic in January 2012.
- District Court found probable cause, appointed counsel, detained C.R., and scheduled an evidentiary hearing; initial waiver of a hearing occurred.
- Dr. Masood evaluated C.R. and recommended a 90-day commitment to MSH and potential involuntary medication to facilitate treatment.
- At the January 11, 2012 hearing, testimony came from L.R. (C.R.’s brother), Dr. Masood, and C.R.; C.R. evidenced psychosis and risk factors; C.R. refused medication and was restrained as needed.
- District Court found C.R. suffered from psychosis and schizophrenia, concluded treatment was necessary, and ordered involuntary commitment for up to three months with authorization for involuntary medication if needed.
- C.R. appealed raising issues about the court’s evaluation of hearing testimony, the absence of a court-appointed friend, and ineffective assistance of counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court properly evaluated hearing testimony | C.R. asserts the court ignored his lucid hearing testimony denying a mental disorder. | State contends the court properly weighed Masood’s testimony and overall evidence. | No clear error; findings supported by substantial evidence. |
| Whether failure to offer a court-appointed friend violated rights | C.R. argues constitutional and statutory right to a court-appointed friend was violated by failure to inquire/offfer. | State asserts current statute does not mandate appointment or inquiry when no willing person is identified; no plain error. | Statute does not mandate appointment; plain error review declined. |
| Whether ineffective assistance of counsel occurred | C.R. claims counsel failed to obtain an independent evaluation, compromising representation. | State asserts counsel conducted adequate investigation and representation; no substantial deficiency. | Record shows effective representation; no basis to vacate commitment. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Mental Health of L.K.-S., 359 Mont. 191 (2011 MT 21) (standard of review; rights at stake; strict adherence to statute)
- In re Mental Health of M.C.D., 355 Mont. 97 (2010 MT 15) (clear error standard; deference to credibility)
- In re Mental Health of C.R.C., 350 Mont. 211 (2009 MT 125) (ineffective assistance factors; independent evaluation considerations)
- In re Mental Health of J.D.L., 348 Mont. 1 (2008 MT 445) (court-appointed friend; plain error review limitations)
- In re Mental Health of A.S.F., 348 Mont. 45 (2008 MT 450) (friend appointment; statutory framework evolution)
- In re Mental Health of K.G.F., 306 Mont. 1 (2001 MT 140) (five-factor ineffective assistance framework)
- In re Mental Health of T.J.F., 359 Mont. 213 (2011 MT 28) (counsel’s advocacy and related considerations in commitment)