No. 80-162
I N THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE O MONTANA
F
1980
I N THE MATTER OF F. B.
Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e T h i r t e e n t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t ,
I n a n d f o r t h e County o f Y e l l o w s t o n e ,
The H o n o r a b l e R o b e r t H. W i l s o n , J u d g e p r e s i d i n g .
C o u n s e l o f Record:
For Appellant:
T e r r y L. S e i f f e r t , B i l l i n g s , Montana
F o r Respondent :
K l a u s P. R i c h t e r , Deputy County A t t o r n e y ,
B i l l i n g s , Montana
Submitted on B r i e f s : J u l y 9 , 1980
Decided: AU G 1 3 1980
Filed:
Mr. J u s t i c e John Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of
t h e Court.
A p e t i t i o n f o r commitment was f i l e d a g a i n s t a p p e l l a n t
o n March 31, 1980. A combined a d j u d i c a t o r y and d i s p o s i -
t i o n a l h e a r i n g on a p p e l l a n t ' s m e n t a l h e a l t h w a s h e l d on
A p r i l 4 , 1980, b e f o r e t h e Honorable R o b e r t H. Wilson. Based
o n t h e e v i d e n c e adduced a t t h e h e a r i n g , a p p e l l a n t was found
t o be s e r i o u s l y m e n t a l l y ill w i t h i n t h e meaning of s e c t i o n
53-21-102, MCA. A commitment o r d e r was e n t e r e d by t h e c o u r t
on t h e s a m e day. A p p e l l a n t a p p e a l s from t h a t o r d e r .
On March 28, 1980, o f f i c e r s of t h e B i l l i n g s P o l i c e
Department w e r e c a l l e d t o i n v e s t i g a t e a d i s t u r b a n c e a t t h e
N o r t h e r n H o t e l i n B i l l i n g s , Montana. Entrance t o appel-
l a n t ' s room was made by way of t h e a s s i s t a n t manager. The
o f f i c e r s e n t e r e d t h e room and o b s e r v e d a p p e l l a n t h o l d i n g a
b a s e b a l l b a t on h i s s h o u l d e r . The o f f i c e r s t a l k e d w i t h
a p p e l l a n t , and l a t e r , w h i l e a p p e l l a n t was s i t t i n g down,
removed t h e b a t . A p p e l l a n t went w i t h t h e o f f i c e r s volun-
t a r i l y t o t h e Deaconess H o s p i t a l . According t o t h e t e s t i -
mony of t h e p o l i c e , a p p e l l a n t d i d n o t make any o v e r t a c t t o
t h e o f f i c e r s o r t h r e a t e n t h e o f f i c e r s b u t was v e r b a l l y
abusive.
P r i o r t o t h e a r r i v a l of t h e p o l i c e a t t h e h o t e l , a p p e l -
l a n t t e s t i f i e d t h a t he had a r g u e d w i t h t h e h o t e l management
w i t h r e g a r d t o h i s r e n t and a p o s s i b l e overpayment o f t h e
month's r e n t .
Dr. Thomas Van Dyk, a p s y c h i a t r i s t , t e s t i f i e d t h a t
a p p e l l a n t s u f f e r e d from p a r a n o i d s c h i z o p h r e n i a . H e further
t e s t i f i e d t h a t while a p p e l l a n t w a s a t t h e h o s p i t a l , he t o r e
t h e s h e e t s o f f t h e bed and threw f o o d , a l t h o u g h he d i d n o t
personally observe t h e s e a c t i o n s . The d o c t o r a l s o t e s t i f i e d
t h a t w h i l e a p p e l l a n t was i n t h e h o s p i t a l , he was a n g r y and
hostile.
D r . Van Dyk t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e r e had been no t h r e a t s o r
o v e r t a c t s toward him o r any o f h i s s t a f f a t t h e h o s p i t a l by
appellant. He f e l t , however, t h a t t h e r e was a p o t e n t i a l
t h a t a p p e l l a n t m i g h t h u r t someone.
A p p e l l a n t ' s a c c o u n t of t h e i n c i d e n t a t t h e N o r t h e r n
H o t e l w a s s i m i l a r t o t h a t of t h e o f f i c e r s . However, a p p e l -
l a n t t e s t i f i e d h e g a v e t h e b a t t o t h e o f f i c e r s and h e d i d
n o t t h r e a t e n t h e o f f i c e r s i n any way. He f u r t h e r t e s t i f i e d
t h a t t h e i n c i d e n t r e l a t i n g t o t h e food on t h e f l o o r a t t h e
h o s p i t a l w a s due t o h i s "messy h a b i t s . "
Based on t h e e v i d e n c e p r e s e n t e d , Judge Wilson found
a p p e l l a n t t o be s e r i o u s l y m e n t a l l y ill. He found Warm
Springs S t a t e Hospital the least r e s t r i c t i v e a v a i l a b l e
f a c i l i t y f o r p r o v i d i n g n e c e s s a r y t r e a t m e n t and i s s u e d a n
a p p r o p r i a t e o r d e r of commitment f o r a p e r i o d of t h r e e months.
A p p e l l a n t p r e s e n t s t h e s o l e i s s u e of whether t h e r e w a s
s u f f i c i e n t evidence t o support t h e D i s t r i c t Court's f i n d i n g
t h a t a p p e l l a n t w a s s e r i o u s l y m e n t a l l y ill w i t h i n t h e meaning
of s e c t i o n 53-21-102, MCA.
S e c t i o n 53-21-102(14), MCA, d e f i n e s s e r i o u s l y m e n t a l l y
ill:
" ' S e r i o u s l y m e n t a l l y i l l ' means s u f f e r i n g from
a m e n t a l d i s o r d e r which h a s r e s u l t e d i n s e l f -
inflicted injury or injury t o others o r the
imminent t h r e a t t h e r e o f o r which h a s d e p r i v e d
t h e p e r s o n a f f l i c t e d of t h e a b i l i t y t o pro-
t e c t h i s l i f e o r h e a l t h . For t h i s p u r p o s e ,
i n j u r y means p h y s i c a l i n j u r y . No p e r s o n may
b e i n v o l u n t a r i l y committed t o a m e n t a l h e a l t h
f a c i l i t y o r d e t a i n e d f o r e v a l u a t i o n and t r e a t -
ment b e c a u s e he i s a n e p i l e p t i c , m e n t a l l y de-
f i c i e n t , mentally retarded, s e n i l e o r suffer-
i n g from a m e n t a l d i s o r d e r u n l e s s t h e condi-
t i o n caused him t o b e s e r i o u s l y m e n t a l l y ill
w i t h i n t h e meaning of t h i s p a r t . "
The f i n d i n g o f s e r i o u s l y m e n t a l l y ill p l a c e s a t w o f o l d
burden on t h e S t a t e t o show (1) a m e n t a l d i s o r d e r and, i n
conjunction t h a t ( 2 ) t h e mental d i s o r d e r has r e s u l t e d i n
s e l f - i n f l i c t e d i n j u r y o r physical i n j u r y t o others o r an
"imminent t h r e a t t h e r e o f . " The proof r e q u i r e d f o r t h i s
d e f i n i t i o n i s t h a t t h e m e n t a l d i s o r d e r be shown by r e a s o n -
a b l e m e d i c a l c e r t a i n t y and t h e s t a n d a r d of proof r e q u i r e d of
o v e r t a c t s i s beyond a r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t :
" ( 2 ) The s t a n d a r d of proof i n any h e a r i n g
h e l d p u r s u a n t t o t h i s s e c t i o n i s p r o o f beyond
a r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t w i t h r e s p e c t t o any p h y s i -
c a l f a c t s o r e v i d e n c e and c l e a r and c o n v i n c i n g
evidence a s t o a l l o t h e r matters, except t h a t
m e n t a l d i s o r d e r s s h a l l be e v i d e n c e d t o a r e a -
sonable medical c e r t a i n t y . Imminent t h r e a t of
self-inflicted injury o r injury t o others shall
by e v i d e n c e d by o v e r t a c t s , s u f f i c i e n t l y r e c e n t
i n t i m e a s t o be m a t e r i a l and r e l e v a n t a s t o
the respondent' s present condition. " Section
53-21-126 ( 2 ) , MCA.
T h i s C o u r t a d d r e s s e d t h e q u e s t i o n of what i s a n "im-
m i n e n t t h r e a t " i n M a t t e r of Goedert ( 1 9 7 9 ) , - Mont. I
591 P.2d 222, 36 St.Rep. 393, where t h e a p p e l l a n t was found
t o be s e r i o u s l y m e n t a l l y ill. The a p p e l l a n t i n G o e d e r t had
p u b l i c l y t h r e a t e n e d t o k i l l a woman whom he had p r e v i o u s l y
a c c u s e d of involvement i n t h e k i l l i n g of h i s b r o t h e r . He
repeated t h e t h r e a t s t o a p o l i c e o f f i c e r a f t e r being a r -
r e s t e d i n connection with t h e incident. T h i s C o u r t found
t h a t t h e man's a c t i o n s amounted t o a n " o v e r t a c t " s u f f i c i e n t
t o s a t i s f y t h e c i v i l i n v o l u n t a r y commitment p r o v i s i o n t h a t
"imminent t h r e a t of i n j u r y t o o t h e r s s h a l l be e v i d e n c e d by
overt acts."
I n l i g h t of t h e d i f f i c u l t y of p r e d i c t i n g t h a t a g i v e n
m e n t a l s t a t e i s l i k e l y t o r e s u l t i n f u t u r e a n t i s o c i a l con-
d u c t , i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o r e q u i r e t h e commission of some
overt act. When t h i s i s coupled w i t h p s y c h i a t r i c e v a l u a -
t i o n , t h e c o u r t w i l l t h e n be i n a b e t t e r p o s i t i o n t o a s s e s s
t h e l i k e l i h o o d of t h e i n d i v i d u a l committing s i m i l a r a c t s .
A p e r s o n c a n b e committed t o a m e n t a l h e a l t h f a c i l i t y
i f he o r s h e i s found t o be s e r i o u s l y m e n t a l l y ill. Serious
m e n t a l i l l n e s s i s a m e n t a l d i s o r d e r and a showing of "an
imminent t h r e a t of s e l f - i n f l i c t e d i n j u r y o r i n j u r y t o o t h e r s
. . ." S e c t i o n 53-21-102(14), MCA. T h i s imminent t h r e a t
must be e v i d e n c e d by a n o v e r t a c t . Imminent t h r e a t d o e s n o t
mean t h a t a p e r s o n may p o s s i b l y c a u s e a n i n j u r y a t some t i m e
i n the d i s t a n t o r uncertain future. The d a n g e r must be
f a i r l y immediate. A t t h e same t i m e , t h e law d o e s n o t re-
q u i r e proof beyond a r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t t h a t a n i n j u r y w i l l
occur i n t h e f u t u r e . Threat i s not c e r t a i n t y . The law
r e q u i r e s o n l y proof beyond a r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t t h a t t h e
t h r e a t of f u t u r e i n j u r y p r e s e n t l y e x i s t s and t h a t t h e t h r e a t
i s imminent, t h a t i s , impending, l i k e l y t o o c c u r a t any
moment. I f beyond a r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t t h e r e i s a p r e s e n t
i n d i c a t i o n o f p r o b a b l e p h y s i c a l i n j u r y which i s l i k e l y t o
o c c u r a t any moment o r i n t h e immediate f u t u r e , and i f t h i s
i n j u r y would be a r e s u l t of a m e n t a l d i s o r d e r , t h e n t h e
p e r s o n s u f f e r i n g from such m e n t a l d i s o r d e r i s s e r i o u s l y
m e n t a l l y ill w i t h i n t h e meaning of t h e a c t .
C o u r t s have had d i f f i c u l t y i n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e d e f i n i -
t i o n of o v e r t a c t . Overt a c t i s a behavior. This behavior
t e n d s t o be dangerous b e h a v i o r o r a m a n i f e s t a t i o n of danger-
ousness. T h i s b e h a v i o r need n o t be a completed a c t . An
a t t e m p t o r t h r e a t , o r even a f a i l u r e t o a c t may s u f f i c e . An
i n d i v i d u a l i s n o t committed b e c a u s e of h i s c o n d u c t o r a c -
t i o n s , b u t r a t h e r b e c a u s e of h i s s t a t u s a s a m e n t a l l y ill
and dangerous p e r s o n . The o v e r t a c t o r b e h a v i o r i s m e r e l y
e v i d e n c e of t h i s s t a t u s .
The t h r e a t t o k i l l a n o t h e r i s a v e r b a l o v e r t a c t . It
m a n i f e s t s t h e commission of a dangerous a c t upon o n e s e l f o r
another. When t h e r e i s proof beyond a r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t t h a t
t h e r e i s a p r e s e n t i n d i c a t i o n of p r o b a b l e p h y s i c a l i n j u r y
l i k e l y t o o c c u r a t any moment o r i n t h e immediate f u t u r e ,
coupled with t h e f i n d i n g w i t h i n a reasonable medical cer-
t a i n t y t h a t t h e i n d i v i d u a l i s s u f f e r i n g from a m e n t a l d i s -
o r d e r , t h e n i n v o l u n t a r y c i v i l commitment of t h a t p e r s o n i s
required. Such was t h e c a s e i n G o e d e r t .
I n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e we must l o o k a t a l l t h e f a c t s p r e -
s e n t e d and t h e r e c o r d of a l l t h e t e s t i m o n y . T h i s C o u r t must
a s k : Whether a p p e l l a n t engaged i n b e h a v i o r t h a t w a s d a n g e r o u s
o r m a n i f e s t e d t h e p r o b a b l e o c c u r r e n c e of a dangerous a c t ;
whether a p p e l l a n t ' s a c t i o n s o r o v e r t a c t s e v i d e n c e d a n i m m i -
n e n t t h r e a t of s e l f - i n f l i c t e d i n j u r y o r i n j u r y t o o t h e r s ;
whether t h e r e was proof beyond a r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t t h a t t h e r e
i s a p r e s e n t i n d i c a t i o n of p r o b a b l e p h y s i c a l i n j u r y which i s
l i k e l y t o o c c u r a t any moment o r i n t h e immediate f u t u r e ;
and f i n a l l y , whether t h e r e was e v i d e n c e w i t h i n a r e a s o n a b l e
m e d i c a l c e r t a i n t y t h a t a p p e l l a n t s u f f e r e d from a m e n t a l
disorder.
Appellant caused s e v e r a l d i s t u r b a n c e s a t t h e Northern
Hotel. H e w a s b e i n g l o u d and a b u s i v e and was throwing food.
P o l i c e o f f i c e r s a r r i v e d and knocked on h i s d o o r r e q u e s t i n g
t o t a l k t o him. H e r e f u s e d a d m i s s i o n of t h e o f f i c e r s .
Testimony i n d i c a t e d t h a t a p p e l l a n t y e l l e d a t t h e o f f i c e r s ,
and when e n t r a n c e was made i n t o t h e room by t h e a s s i s t a n t
manager, t h e y o b s e r v e d a p p e l l a n t w i t h a b a s e b a l l b a t on h i s
shoulder. A p p e l l a n t t e s t i f i e d h e knew t h e y w e r e coming and,
t h e r e f o r e , "armed" h i m s e l f . I t took s e v e r a l m i n u t e s of
p e r s u a s i o n b e f o r e a p p e l l a n t s a t down and t h e b a t c o u l d b e
t a k e n away.
A t t h e h o s p i t a l a p p e l l a n t threw food on t h e f l o o r , t o r e
s h e e t s o f f h i s bed and was d i s o r g a n i z e d . Testimony i n d i -
c a t e d a p p e l l a n t w a s h o s t i l e and a n g r y a t t h e h o s p i t a l .
D r . Van Dyk found a p p e l l a n t t o be p a r a n o i d s c h i z o p h r e n i c ,
f i n d i n g a p p e l l a n t was demanding, and when something was
r e q u e s t e d and was n o t done immediately, he became a n g r y and
threatening.
W f i n d t h e S t a t e h a s s u s t a i n e d i t s burden and h a s s u f -
e
f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e t o answer t h e q u e s t i o n s posed i n o r d e r i n g
c i v i l i n v o l u n t a r y commitments. There w a s a p r e s e n t i n d i c a -
t i o n of p r o b a b l e p h y s i c a l i n j u r y l i k e l y t o o c c u r a t any
moment o r i n t h e immediate f u t u r e . There w a s e v i d e n c e
w i t h i n a reasonable medical c e r t a i n t y t h a t a p p e l l a n t d i d
s u f f e r from a m e n t a l d i s o r d e r . W i t h i n t h e s t a n d a r d of proof
r e q u i r e d by t h e s t a t u t e , w e f i n d t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t had a
s u b s t a n t i a l b a s i s f o r f i n d i n g t h a t a p p e l l a n t posed a n "im-
m i n e n t t h r e a t of i n j u r y t o o t h e r s " and meets t h e s e r i o u s l y
m e n t a l l y ill d e f i n i t i o n .
A p p e l l a n t a r g u e s t h a t t h e r e w a s no e v i d e n c e t h a t h e
p h y s i c a l l y h u r t h i m s e l f o r a n o t h e r and t h a t t h i s b e h a v i o r
c a n n o t b e r e g a r d e d a s dangerous o r r e q u i r i n g commitment.
R e c e n t l y t h e Kansas A p p e l l a t e C o u r t d i s c u s s e d t h i s argument.
The Kansas commitment s t a t u t e i s s i m i l a r t o t h a t of Montana
and t h e c a s e i s a p p l i c a b l e h e r e . The c o u r t s a i d :
". . . W e do n o t b e l i e v e t h e l e g i s l a t u r e envi-
s i o n e d t h a t a p e r s o n c o u l d b e found m e n t a l l y
ill and s u b j e c t t o i n v o l u n t a r y commitment o n l y
where t h e r e i s e v i d e n c e of actual v i o l e n c e t o
p e r s o n s o r p h y s i c a l harm. To c o n s t r u e t h e
s t a t u t e i n such a manner would f r u s t r a t e t h e
o b v i o u s i n t e n t i o n of p r o v i d i n g t r e a t m e n t f o r
c e r t a i n m e n t a l l y ill p e r s o n s b e f o r e p h y s i c a l
harm r e s u l t s and would e x t e n d t h e p e r s o n a l
s a f e g u a r d s of t h e s t a t u t o r y scheme t o a n il-
l o g i c a l d e g r e e . The l e g i s l a t i o n c o n t a i n s no
r e q u i r e m e n t o f p h y s i c a l harm and w e c a n c e r -
t a i n l y f o r e s e e a s i t u a t i o n , such a s t h a t p r e -
s e n t e d h e r e i n , where a r g u a b l y p a s s i v e b e h a v i o r
g i v e s r i s e t o a n imminently d a n g e r o u s c o n d i -
tion. While e a c h c a s e must be d e c i d e d on i t s
f a c t s , we c o n c l u d e t h e e v i d e n c e , when viewed
i n t h e l i g h t most f a v o r a b l e t o p e t i t i o n e r , was
s u f f i c i e n t t o form t h e b a s i s f o r a r e a s o n a b l e
i n f e r e n c e of d a n g e r o u s n e s s w i t h i n t h e meaning
of K A 1977 Supp. 5 9 - 2 9 0 2 ( 1 ) . " Matter of
S
Gatson ( 1 9 7 9 ) , 3 Kan.App.2d 265, 593 P.2d 423,
427.
The o r d e r of commitment of t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t i s
affirmed.
W e concur:
Chief J u s t i c e
w
Q~--Q%
I
Justices