EZRA WADE, APPELLANT,
v.
NORTHEAST FLORIDA STATE HOSPITAL, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida appellate court reversed a Baker Act involuntary commitment order because the evidence was insufficient to meet the clear and convincing standard required by statute for demonstrating potential for aggression and substantial harm.
A Baker Act involuntary commitment order must be supported by clear and convincing evidence of the statutory criteria, and conclusory recitations without detailed factual substantiation are insufficient.
[1] A Baker Act involuntary commitment order based on potential for aggression and substantial harm must be supported by specific factual evidence meeting the clear and convi…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Wade was subject to a Baker Act order for continued involuntary placement based on allegations of potential aggression and substantial harm …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Involuntary Placement cases and more on FLexlaw
ALLEN, Judge.
The appellant challenges a Baker Act order of continued involuntary placement for treatment pursuant to section 394.467, Florida Statutes. The order refers to the appellant’s potential for aggression, and the possibility of substantial harm to his well-being.
However, these conclusory recitations are not fully substantiated by the facts in evidence. The testifying doctor indicated that the appellant had been hostile, threatening, and verbally demanding, but the doctor did not offer any significant details in this regard. The doctor also asserted that the appellant had made inappropriate propositions, but the doctor could not clearly recall these incidents. There was no testimony as to prior incidents involving substantial harm, nor any testimony as to the manner in which future conduct might produce the necessary level of harm under section 394.467(l)(a)2, Florida Statutes.
The testimony is thus insufficient to satisfy the statutory criteria by the requisite standard of clear and convincing evidence. Braden v. State, 575 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Olive v. State, 509 So. 2d 1375 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); see also Jones v. State, 611 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). The appealed order is therefore reversed.
DAVIS, J. and SMITH, Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Boller v. State, 775 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…acts in evidence, that a patient has a potential for aggression and the possibility of substantial harm to herself, is insufficient to satisfy the statutory criteria by the clear and convincing evidence standard. See Wade v. Northeast Florida State, 655 So. 2d 125 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). Sub judice, although the State established Appellant is mentally ill and refuses to take her psychotropic medications, the record contains no clear and convincing evidence that she poses a present threat of substantial harm to…
-
Bacon v. State, 676 So. 2d 69 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…d to prove by clear and convincing evidence that appellant will suffer from neglect without treatment, that there is a present threat of substantial harm to appellant’s well being, or that he would harm others. Wade v. Northeast Florida State Hosp., 655 So. 2d 125 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (statutory criteria of clear and convincing evidence was not met with regard to order of continued involuntary placement for mental-health treatment where order referred only to conclusory recitations of psychiatrist and was not…
-
C. D. v. Involuntary Placement (Fla. 2d DCA 2023)…DCA 2009). ---PAGE 4--- evidence of the patient's "threatening" and "agitated" behavior, without more, was insufficient to support a finding that he was likely to inflict serious bodily harm on himself or others); Wade v. Ne. Fla. State Hosp., 655 So. 2d 125, 125 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (concluding that evidence of the patient's "potential for aggression" and the "possibility of substantial harm" was insufficient where "[t]here was no testimony as to prior incidents involving substantial harm, nor any te…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- In re Leola Olive v. State, 509 So. 2d 1375 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- Jones v. State, 611 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Cecil E. Locke and his Wife v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 509 So. 2d 1375 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- Riggins Fed. Ins. Agency, Inc. v. ART Bruns Executive Club, Inc., 575 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
- Braden v. State, 575 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)