Jack Nelson Jones Professional Association

June 20-26, 2016

Bates v. State, 2016 Ark. App. 326 (June 8, 2016)

This appeal comes from the Crawford County Circuit Court, Honorable Gary Cottrell presiding. The case concerns involuntary civil commitment.

Mary Bates, a teacher at Central Middle School in Van Buren, was accused of causing a disturbance on August 10, 2015 and refused the principal’s request to leave the building. When Van Buren School District Superintendent Dr. Harold Jeffcoat attempted to talk with Bates, she would not allow him to talk and spoke about things seemingly unrelated to why he was there. Bates subsequently met with Jeffcoat and assistant superintendent Brian Summerhill in Jeffcoat’s office; Frank Petray, the School Reserve Officer, was also present. Bates was asked if she understood the reason for the meeting, to which she provided seemingly unrelated responses. She asked Jeffcoat and Summerhill how many children had to be hurt or how many children had to die. She stated that Summerhill knew what she was talking about. She refused to let Jeffcoat speak. She soon got mad, declared the meeting over, and slammed the door as she left. Petray followed Bates to the parking lot and performed field sobriety tests, which she passed before leaving. Petray provided Jeffcoat with a police report of the incident.

On August 14, Bates sent group text messages telling individuals that they needed to do their jobs. Petray went to Bates’ home and informed her to stop sending the messages and she was no longer allowed on school property. She asked Petray, “How many children have to be hurt?” On August 17, Petray filed a petition for involuntary commitment. The court entered an order for detention, examination, and hearing the same day.

At the hearing on August 19, Petray testified regarding the events on August 10 and 14. He also stated that Bates made no specific threats to harm herself or others, and that he did not believe her to be a significant risk to herself or others. Jeffcoat also testified. He stated Bates’ tone was angry and she displayed some aggression; but also that she never threatened anyone with bodily harm and he did not feel in “mortal danger” during his interactions with her. Bates denied making any threats to children. She was in a professional development meeting on August 10 at which a video on bullying was being shown. She stated a majority of teachers present were not paying attention, were leaving the meeting, playing on their cellphones, and talking to each other. Further, Bates testified that she believed bullying was not being addressed properly and that her statements about children getting hurt were in reference to bullying. She also discussed her frustration with the way things were being handled at her school, including the lack of time to prepare between classes and the many rules they had to follow.

At the conclusion of the hearing, Bates moved for the petition to be dismissed because the State failed to provide any evidence that she was a threat to anyone, and thus the evidence did not justify involuntary commitment. The State responded the petition was “in regard to the kids. She made multiple statements regarding danger or death to kids and out of an abundance of caution, the court should consider this.” The trial court found that Bates suffered from mental disease and defect and that she was a danger to herself and others. As a result, she was committed for a period of up to forty-five days. Bates appealed.

On appeal, the Court began be quoting from Arkansas Code Annotated § 20-47-207, Arkansas’s involuntary civil commitment statute. The statute provides that a person shall be eligible for involuntary admission if that person is in such a mental condition, as a result of mental illness, disease, or disorder that she poses a clear and present danger to herself of others. Further, pursuant to the statute, “a clear and present danger to others” is established by demonstrating that a person “has inflicted, attempted to inflict, or threatened to inflict serious bodily harm on another, and there is a reasonable probability that the conduct could occur if admission is not ordered.”

Next, the Court explained that a hearing must be held on a petition for involuntary confinement and at that time, the court must determine whether clear and convincing evidence has been presented that the person sought to be involuntarily admitted is a danger to herself or to others. Clear and convincing evidence is that degree of proof that will produce in the fact-finder a firm conviction as to the allegation sought to be established.

Here, the Court stated, the State failed to meet its burden of proof. There was no evidence that Bates posed a danger to herself or others based on the testimony in the record. By all accounts, no one feared that she was a present danger to herself or to anyone else. The State attempted to excuse its lack of proof by contending that the court should consider the petition out of an abundance of caution. However, the Court admonished that the statute does not allow an abundance of caution to take the place of clear and convincing evidence when someone is being involuntarily committed. Accordingly, the Court concluded that the trial court’s finding that Bates posed a clear and present danger to herself or others was clearly erroneous. Therefore, the Court reversed and dismissed the trial court’s decision and ordered Bates’ involuntary commitment removed from the treatment records at Arkansas State Hospital or like Facility. Reversed and Dismissed.