Opinion
No. 2021-307-Appeal. MH-21-495
10-25-2022
IN RE P.Z.
Thomas J. Corrigan, Jr., Esq. for Petitioner Amy E. Verri, Esq. for Respondent
Thomas J. Corrigan, Jr., Esq. for Petitioner
Amy E. Verri, Esq. for Respondent
ORDER
This case came before the Supreme Court for oral argument on September 29, 2022, pursuant to an order directing the parties to show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not be summarily decided. The respondent, P.Z., appeals from the entry of a November 12, 2021 order issued by the District Court substituting its judgment for the respondent and consenting to the administration of certain medications. On appeal, the respondent asserts that: (1) the respondent's claims are appropriately before this Court because they are of extreme public importance, capable of repetition, and yet will evade review; (2) the hearing judge erred in granting the petition for instructions because the clear and convincing evidence standard of proof was not satisfied; and (3) the hearing judge erred in granting the petition because no determination was made whether the respondent was incompetent to make informed medical decisions. After considering the parties’ written and oral submissions, we conclude that cause has not been shown, and we proceed to decide the appeal at this time. At oral argument, counsel for the respondent acknowledged that the respondent is no longer hospitalized, no longer medicated, and the aforementioned criminal charges have been dismissed pursuant to Rule 48(a) of the Superior Court Rules of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, there is no justiciable controversy before this Court.
At the time of the order, the respondent was at Eleanor Slater Hospital after being found incompetent to stand trial in the then-pending criminal cases N3-2021-0252A and W3-2019-0023A on charges of disorderly conduct, willful trespass, and vandalism.
Accordingly, the instant appeal is dismissed on the grounds of mootness.