In re Det. D.H.

502 P.3d 1284

In the MATTER OF the DETENTION OF D.H., Appellant.

No. 54865-8-II

Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 2.

Filed February 1, 2022

Gregory Charles Link, Kate Benward, Jessica Constance Wolfe, Richard Wayne Lechich, Washington Appellate Project, 1511 3rd Ave. Ste. 610, Seattle, WA, 98101-1683, for Appellant.

Marcus Jay Miller, Stephen D. Trinen, Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney's Off., 955 Tacoma Ave. S. Ste. 301, Tacoma, WA, 98402-2160, for Respondent.

PUBLISHED OPINION

Maxa, J.

¶1 DH appeals the trial court's order involuntarily committing him for 14 days of treatment under former RCW 71.05.230 (2019).

¶2 DH was placed in emergency detention for a 72-hour evaluation period after his mother reported that he was behaving strangely. A designated crisis responder (DCR) evaluated DH for purposes of a 14-day detention for involuntary treatment, but did not file a petition for a 14-day detention because DH agreed to voluntary inpatient treatment. DH was transferred to Wellfound Behavioral Health Hospital. Later, DH demanded to leave, making his continued detention involuntary. At the end of the 72-hour period but while DH still was detained, a DCR evaluated DH again and ordered another 72-hour detention. Wellfound staff then filed a timely petition for a 14-day involuntary commitment.

¶3 DH moved to dismiss the petition because he was detained for more than the statutory 72-hour maximum without a hearing. The trial court denied DH's motion to dismiss. After a hearing, the court found that DH was gravely disabled and ordered that DH be committed for 14 days for involuntary treatment. The court did not inform DH at the beginning of the hearing as required by statute that he could lose his firearm rights if he did not voluntarily consent to treatment, but DH did not object.

¶4 We hold that (1) dismissal of the 14-day petition was not required because the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that Wellfound did not totally disregard the statutory requirements of the Involuntary Treatment Act (ITA), chapter 71.05 RCW, in detaining DH for more than 72 hours, (2) DH cannot challenge the trial court's failure to advise regarding firearm rights for the first time on appeal because there was no manifest constitutional error under RAP 2.5(a)(3), and (3) the trial court's factual findings support the court's conclusion that DH was gravely disabled. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's 14-day involuntary commitment order.

FACTS

Background

¶5 On April 29, 2020, DH was detained for 72 hours and brought to Allenmore Hospital from his home where he resides with his mother, who reported that he was acting strangely. DH complained that his "mother and brother poisoned me and people are pretending to be people I know." Clerk's Papers (CP) at 55. Angela Loi, a DCR, evaluated DH. DH told Loi he would accept inpatient psychiatric treatment and did not want to return home. Because DH agreed to voluntary treatment, Loi did not file a petition for 14 days of involuntary commitment. Loi coordinated with Wellfound to have DH transferred there.

¶6 DH arrived at Wellfound on Thursday, April 30. Ian Callahan, Wellfound's ITA coordinator, met with DH on May 1 and determined that DH's detention was not voluntary and that DH did not want to be in the hospital. Callahan attempted to get DH to stay voluntarily, but DH repeatedly refused. DH demanded to leave, stating that his detention was a conspiracy and they were stealing his intellectual property. In addition, DH showed symptoms of delusions and said that he was going to kill his mother because she was an imposter.

¶7 DH's 72-hour detention expired at 9:48 PM on May 4. However, Wellfound did not release him.

¶8 On May 5, a DCR reevaluated DH and recommended another 72-hour detention. Callahan then filed the 14-day petition. The petition stated, "The Respondent has been advised of the need for treatment, and the Petitioners have evidence that the Respondent has not in good faith agreed to voluntary treatment. The Respondent has also been informed of the loss of firearm rights if involuntarily committed ." CP at 12 (emphasis added).

¶9 DH subsequently filed a motion to dismiss the 14-day petition on the grounds that Wellfound totally disregarded ITA requirements by detaining him for more than the 72 hours after his initial detention allowed by statute.

Hearing on the Petition

¶10 The trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing on Wellfound's 14-day petition. At the beginning of the hearing, the court did not advise DH orally and in writing that he could lose his firearm rights if he did not voluntarily consent to treatment. DH did not object to the court's failure to advise regarding firearm rights.

¶11 Loi and Callahan testified to the facts stated above. Dr. Leslie Hernandez, a psychiatrist at Wellfound, also testified. She evaluated DH for mental disorders on May 4 and observed DH having delusions of people being replaced by imposters and people telepathically telling him to kill his mother. Dr. Hernandez recommended DH for continued hospitalization for safety.

¶12 Callahan testified about his interaction with DH during his evaluation. He testified that Dr. Hernandez diagnosed DH with unspecified schizophrenia and that he believed DH was gravely disabled. Callahan also testified that there was no less restrictive treatment at that time because DH categorically denied he had a mental disorder and refused treatment. Callahan stated that DH told him that he did not personally own any firearms, but could probably get access to one.

¶13 DH testified that he wanted to leave Wellfound, and never wanted to hurt himself, his mother, or anyone else. He only agreed to the initial 72-hour detention because he thought they would determine he was completely fine and not trying to hurt anyone.

¶14 The trial court denied DH's motion to dismiss the petition because it found the consecutive 72-hour detentions were not a total disregard of DH's rights. The court then found that DH suffered from a mental disorder and was gravely disabled. The court determined that there were no less restrictive placements and ordered a 14-day detention for evaluation and treatment. The court also told DH that he had lost his right to possess a firearm.

¶15 The trial court issued findings of fact and conclusions of law. The court made the following findings regarding DH's current mental status:

[DH] initially was cooperative but then became irritable. He remains irritable and agitated. He believes there is a conspiracy to keep him at Wellfound. His memory was impaired. He had difficulty recalling stories around his detention. ... [I]nitially his voice was rapid and pressured. He could hear voices and they could hear his thoughts. He said CIA wanted to restrict his speech. He still jumps from subject to subject. [DH] denies he has a mental illness, and this was all a conspiracy. He still reports delusional ideation. He still believes he was put in the hospital by a government conspiracy. At one point, [DH] said he would get a loaded firearm and hold it to someone's head, so they have to tell the truth.

CP at 94-95. The court also found that DH "does not take medications as prescribed." CP at 95.

¶16 The court found that DH "manifests severe deterioration in routine functioning evidenced by repeated and escalating loss of cognitive or volitional control over his or her actions and is not receiving such care as is essential for his or her health or safety." CP at 95. The court entered a conclusion of law that DH was gravely disabled.

¶17 DH appeals the trial court's order committing him for 14 days of involuntary treatment.

ANALYSIS

A. SUCCESSIVE 72- HOUR DETENTIONS

¶18 DH argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss Wellfound's petition for a 14-day involuntary detention because he was subjected to two successive 72-hour detentions without a court hearing, which he claims violated due process and totally disregarded the requirements of the ITA. We disagree.¹

1. Legal Principles

a. 72-Hour and 14-Day Detentions

¶19 A DCR can order that a person be taken into emergency custody for not more than 72 hours when they receive information that the person, because of a mental disorder, presents "an imminent likelihood of serious harm, or is in imminent danger because of being gravely disabled." Former RCW 71.05.153(1) (2019).² The 72-hour period does not include Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays. Former RCW 71.05.180 (2019).

¶20 A person detained for 72 hours for evaluation and treatment may be committed for 14 additional days of involuntary treatment. Former RCW 71.05.230 (2018). But a petition for continued commitment can be filed only if certain requirements are met. Former RCW 71.05.230. One requirement is that "[t]he person has been advised of the need for voluntary treatment and the professional staff of the facility has evidence that he or she has not in good faith volunteered." Former RCW 71.05.230(2).

¶21 When a petition for a 14-day involuntary commitment has been filed, the court must hold a probable cause hearing on the petition within 72 hours of the initial detention. Former RCW 71.05.240(1) (2019). A person who has been detained for 72 hours must be released at the end of that period unless a court orders continued detention for further treatment or the person is referred for further care on a voluntary basis. Former RCW 71.05.210(1)(b) (2019).

¶22 Any person who voluntarily is admitted to a public or private agency for inpatient treatment must be released upon request. Former RCW 71.05.050(1) (2019). However, if the professional staff of the agency regards the person requesting discharge as "presenting, as a result of a mental disorder ..., an imminent likelihood of serious harm, or is gravely disabled, they may detain such person for sufficient time to notify the [DCR] of such person's condition to enable the [DCR] to authorize such person being further held in custody." Former RCW 71.05.050(...