State
12-17-00224-CV
| Tex. App. | Nov 30, 2017Background
- J.G. was found incompetent to stand trial and committed to Rusk State Hospital for competency restoration; he refused psychoactive medication.
- Treating physician Dr. Stephen Poplar filed an application seeking a court order to administer oral and intramuscular psychoactive medications (antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, anxiolytics).
- At the hearing, evidence included Poplar’s application and testimony from Dr. Larry Hawkins (who evaluated J.G. and agreed with the diagnosis and treatment plan) and testimony from J.G., who denied having a mental illness and refused medication.
- Doctors diagnosed J.G. with bipolar disorder, most recent episode manic, severe with psychotic features, and opined that he lacked capacity to decide about medication because he did not acknowledge his illness and could not rationally weigh risks/benefits.
- The trial court found by clear and convincing evidence that J.G. lacked capacity to decide about medication and that treatment was in his best interest; the court of appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence was legally and factually sufficient to show J.G. lacked capacity to decide on psychoactive medication | J.G.: evidence insufficient; trial court relied on conclusory statements and his expressed preferences; cited E.G. | State/Doctors: medical records, physicians’ testimony, and J.G.’s persistent denial of illness show inability to understand/ weigh risks and benefits | Affirmed: evidence (applications + physician testimony + observed behavior) was legally and factually sufficient to find lack of capacity |
Key Cases Cited
- In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256 (Tex. 2002) (standard for legal sufficiency under clear-and-convincing evidence)
- In re C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. 2002) (standard for factual sufficiency review)
- State v. Addington, 588 S.W.2d 569 (Tex. 1979) (definition of clear and convincing evidence)
- State ex rel. E.G., 249 S.W.3d 728 (Tex. App.–Tyler 2008, no pet.) (concluding an application alone, without physician testimony, is insufficient to prove lack of capacity)