State v. DeFries, 2012 ND 7

W.J.C.A. appeals district court orders involuntarily committing him to the State Hospital for up to 90 days and administering medication.
Probation officer petitioned that W.J.C.A. posed a danger to himself and others due to suicidal threats and threatening messages.
Preliminary hearing found probable cause to commit for 14 days; treating psychiatrist Pryatel diagnosed bipolar disorder and noted manic state and medication refusal.
Treatment hearing found mental illness, danger to self/others, and need for treatment; court ordered in-patient treatment for up to 90 days and involuntary medication.
W.J.C.A. was briefly released and later placed in a less restrictive setting at South East Human Service Center with prescribed medications.
On appeal, W.J.C.A. challenges the sufficiency of evidence for being a person requiring treatment and for involuntary medication.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether there was clear and convincing evidence W.J.C.A. is a person requiring treatment.	W.J.C.A. argues the evidence failed to prove mental illness and need for treatment.	State contends the doctor’s testimony and independent sources establish illness and risk.	Not clearly erroneous; evidence supports person requiring treatment.
Whether involuntary treatment with medication was properly ordered under § 25-03.1-18.1(1)(a).	W.J.C.A. contends not all four statutory factors were established or properly applied.	State asserts all four statutory factors were proven by Pryatel’s testimony and certifications.	Not clearly erroneous; four factors satisfied and medication order valid.
Whether the district court properly admitted and relied on expert testimony in establishing basis for treatment.	W.J.C.A. argues hearsay underpinning the basis for the diagnosis should not be admissible.	State argues experts may rely on hearsay in forming opinions and thus base diagnosis on available evidence.	Court correctly allowed expert reliance on records and observations to support diagnosis.

In re D.A., 698 N.W.2d 474 (2005 ND 116) (review standard for involuntary commitment; clear and convincing standard applied)
In re W.K., 776 N.W.2d 572 (2009 ND 218) (balance liberty interests with treatment necessity; clear and convincing standard)
In re D.P., 636 N.W.2d 921 (2001 ND 203) (district court may rely on independent sources beyond petition)
In re C.A.H., 785 N.W.2d 253 (2010 ND 131) (four-factor test for involuntary medication)
In re L.D., 671 N.W.2d 791 (2003 ND 182) (unrefuted expert testimony supports finding of mental illness)
In re P.L.P., 556 N.W.2d 657 (1996 ND) (admissibility framework for expert reliance on hearsay)
Davis v. Killu, 710 N.W.2d 118 (2006 ND 32) (experts may describe hearsay relied upon to form opinions)