{
  "id": 1260342,
  "name": "In re VICKY L. ELLIS (The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Vicky L. Ellis, Respondent-Appellant)",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Ellis",
  "decision_date": "1996-10-30",
  "docket_number": "No. 3-96-0332",
  "first_page": "691",
  "last_page": "694",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "284 Ill. App. 3d 691"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "558 N.E.2d 807",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1990,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "809-10"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "201 Ill. App. 3d 10",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        2593342
      ],
      "year": 1990,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "13-14"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/201/0010-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "667 N.E.2d 720",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1996,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "725"
        },
        {
          "page": "725"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "281 Ill. App. 3d 956",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        150248
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1996,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "965"
        },
        {
          "page": "965"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/281/0956-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "617 N.E.2d 844",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1993,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "846"
        },
        {
          "page": "847",
          "parenthetical": "holding that the 24-hour deadline for filing a petition for commitment is a bright-line rule"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "247 Ill. App. 3d 615",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        2929946
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1993,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "618"
        },
        {
          "page": "620"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/247/0615-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "633 N.E.2d 74",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1994,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "81"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "261 Ill. App. 3d 221",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        5375060
      ],
      "year": 1994,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "230"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/261/0221-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 352,
    "char_count": 5548,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.778,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.7398418347911273e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7068458431360284
    },
    "sha256": "eff3fc4e3376c183fe979c44a24b4f242e8b4c33d55751ab03c6d35c8dcbb0c7",
    "simhash": "1:9894fe53cffdfeaa",
    "word_count": 920
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:51:55.867701+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "In re VICKY L. ELLIS (The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Vicky L. Ellis, Respondent-Appellant)."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "JUSTICE-McCUSKEY\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThe respondent, Vicky L. Ellis, appeals from the judgment of the circuit court of Peoria County finding her subject to involuntary admission to a mental health facility and authorizing the involuntary administration of psychotropic medication.\nFollowing our careful review of the record, we find the State failed to prove that the respondent was examined within 24 hours of her admission pursuant to section 3 \u2014 610 of the Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Code (Code) (405 ILCS 5/3 \u2014 610 (West 1994)). As a result, we reverse.\nFACTS\nAt 3 p.m. on March 12, 1996, an emergency room doctor at Illinois Valley Hospital certified that the respondent was mentally ill and could reasonably be expected to inflict harm upon herself. The doctor\u2019s certificate said the respondent tried to kill herself by cutting her right wrist and index finger. Based on this certificate, the respondent was admitted to the Zeller Mental Health Center (Zeller) the following day.\nAt 2:36 p.m. on March 13, 1996, a petition for involuntary admission was filed in the office of the circuit clerk of Peoria County. The petition included a psychologist\u2019s certificate that he gave the respondent a copy of the petition at \"1100,\u201d within 12 hours of her admission to Zeller. Because the petition was filed at 2:36 p.m., we conclude that a copy of the petition was given to the respondent at 11 a.m.\nDr. Jayalakshmi Attaluri examined the respondent at noon on March 14, 1996, and certified that the respondent was mentally ill and in need of involuntary admission to a mental health facility.\nANALYSIS\nSection 3 \u2014 610 of the Code provides that if a person admitted to a mental health facility by emergency certification is not examined by a psychiatrist within 24 hours of admission, that person \"shall be released forthwith.\u201d (Emphasis added.) 405 ILCS 5/3 \u2014 610 (West 1994). The Code\u2019s procedural safeguards are not mere technicalities; they are essential tools to protect the liberty interests of persons adjudged to be mentally ill. In re Luttrell, 261 Ill. App. 3d 221, 230, 633 N.E.2d 74, 81 (1994). These safeguards must be strictly construed in favor of the respondent. In re La Touche, 247 Ill. App. 3d 615, 618, 617 N.E.2d 844, 846 (1993).\nIt is well-settled law that the 24-hour examination rule is a bright-line rule and failure to conduct an examination within 24 hours results in the release of the respondent. See In re Rovelstad, 281 Ill. App. 3d 956, 965, 667 N.E.2d 720, 725 (1996); In re Valentine, 201 Ill. App. 3d 10, 13-14, 558 N.E.2d 807, 809-10 (1990); see also La Touche, 247 Ill. App. 3d at 620, 617 N.E.2d at 847 (holding that the 24-hour deadline for filing a petition for commitment is a bright-line rule). The burden is upon the State to affirmatively demonstrate that it has complied with the mandates of the Code. Rovelstad, 281 Ill. App. 3d at 965, 667 N.E.2d at 725.\nIn the case at hand, the record shows that Dr. Attaluri\u2019s ex-animation of the respondent did not occur within 24 hours of the respondent\u2019s admission to Zeller. The psychologist certified that the respondent was given a copy of the petition for involuntary commitment at 11 a.m. on March 13, within 12 hours of the respondent\u2019s admission. The record also reflects that the doctor\u2019s examination did not occur until noon on March 14. Because the doctor\u2019s examination was at least one hour too late, the State has failed to prove it complied with the requirements of the Code. Accordingly, the judgment committing the respondent to the mental health facility must be reversed.\nWhile our decision concerning the untimely examination of the respondent is dispositive of the case, we are compelled to note one other apparent error on the part of the State. Section 3 \u2014 601(b)(2) of the Code provides that the petition for involuntary admission must contain the name and address of the spouse, parent, guardian, close relative or friend of the respondent. If the petitioner cannot supply the name, then he or she must state that a diligent inquiry has been made and must specify the steps taken in that inquiry. 405 ILCS 5/3 \u2014 601(b)(2) (West 1994).\nThe petition filed against the respondent does not list the names and addresses required by the statute, nor does it contain a statement of diligent inquiry. The State admits the respondent has been previously hospitalized on approximately 20 occasions and that the respondent\u2019s mother has maintained contact with Zeller. From these facts, we can find no excuse for the State\u2019s failure to comply with the requirements of section 3 \u2014 601(b)(2).\nCONCLUSION\nIn sum, for the reasons stated, the State failed to comply with the 24-hour examination rule found in section 3 \u2014 610 of the Code. As a consequence, we reverse the respondent\u2019s involuntary commitment. Because of our holding, we will not address the other issues raised in this appeal.\nAccordingly, the judgment of the circuit court of Peoria County is reversed.\nReversed.\nHOLDRIDGE, P.J., and MICHELA, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "JUSTICE-McCUSKEY"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Cynthia Z. Tracy, of Guardianship & Advocacy Commission, of Peoria, and Jeff M. Plesko, of Guardianship & Advocacy Commission, of Anna, for appellant.",
      "Kevin W. Lyons, State\u2019s Attorney, of Peoria (John X. Breslin and J. Paul Hoffmann, both of State\u2019s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor\u2019s Office, of counsel), for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "In re VICKY L. ELLIS (The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Vicky L. Ellis, Respondent-Appellant).\nThird District\nNo. 3\u201496\u20140332\nOpinion filed October 30, 1996.\nCynthia Z. Tracy, of Guardianship & Advocacy Commission, of Peoria, and Jeff M. Plesko, of Guardianship & Advocacy Commission, of Anna, for appellant.\nKevin W. Lyons, State\u2019s Attorney, of Peoria (John X. Breslin and J. Paul Hoffmann, both of State\u2019s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor\u2019s Office, of counsel), for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "0691-01",
  "first_page_order": 709,
  "last_page_order": 712
}