People v. Torry G. (In re Torry G.)

6 Citing cases

  1. People v. Robert M. (In re Robert M.)

    2020 Ill. App. 5th 170015 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020)   Cited 4 times

    Whether a patient's willingness to take some medications voluntarily is a " ‘less restrictive’ " treatment within the meaning of the statute is a question of law. In re Torry G. , 2014 IL App (1st) 130709, ¶ 33, 384 Ill.Dec. 91, 16 N.E.3d 187. We will therefore consider that question de novo .

  2. People v. Marcus S. (In re Marcus S.)

    2022 Ill. App. 3d 160710 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022)

    ¶ 25 The administration of involuntary mental health services entails a " ‘massive curtailment of liberty.’ " In re Barbara H. , 183 Ill. 2d 482, 496, 234 Ill.Dec. 215, 702 N.E.2d 555 (1998) (quoting Vitek v. Jones , 445 U.S. 480, 491, 100 S.Ct. 1254, 63 L.Ed.2d 552 (1980) ); see also In re Torry G. , 2014 IL App (1st) 130709, ¶ 31, 384 Ill.Dec. 91, 16 N.E.3d 187 ("Autonomous decisionmaking in matters affecting the body and mind is one of the most valued liberties in a civilized society." (Internal quotation marks omitted.)).

  3. People v. Marcus S. (In re Marcus S.)

    2022 Ill. App. 3d 170014 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022)   Cited 2 times

    In re Barbara H. , 183 Ill. 2d 482, 496, 234 Ill.Dec. 215, 702 N.E.2d 555 (1998) (quoting Vitek v. Jones , 445 U.S. 480, 491, 100 S.Ct. 1254, 63 L.Ed.2d 552 (1980) ); see also In re Torry G. , 2014 IL App (1st) 130709, ¶ 31, 384 Ill.Dec. 91, 16 N.E.3d 187 ("Autonomous decisionmaking in matters affecting the body and mind is one of the most valued liberties in a civilized society." (Internal quotation marks omitted.)).

  4. People v. Rob W. (In re Rob W.)

    2021 Ill. App. 200149 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021)

    We agree there is a need for an authoritative determination on this question. See id. (where no appellate decision "addressed the specific issue raised in this case," the issue was "one of first impression which, as a matter of substantial public concern, is in need of an authoritative determination"); In re Torry G. , 2014 IL App (1st) 130709, ¶ 28, 384 Ill.Dec. 91, 16 N.E.3d 187 (finding a "need for an authoritative interpretation of the matter, since no Illinois case has directly addressed" the question at issue). We believe it is important for trial judges to know whether they are authorized to impose a period of involuntary medication longer than that requested in the petition.

  5. People v. Jennice L. (In re Jennice L.)

    2021 Ill. App. 200407 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021)   Cited 1 times

    not qualify for the public interest exception." See In re Torry G. , 2014 IL App (1st) 130709, ¶ 28, 384 Ill.Dec. 91, 16 N.E.3d 187. Moreover, the underlying order has now expired, the issue is moot, and respondent's argument on this issue raises no question that might apply to her in the future.

  6. People v. H.P. (In re H.P.)

    2019 Ill. App. 5th 150302 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019)   Cited 14 times

    See In re Torry G. , 2014 IL App (1st) 130709, ¶ 28, 384 Ill.Dec. 91, 16 N.E.3d 187 (noting the need for an authoritative decision where no prior Illinois cases have resolved the question raised). Guidance on this matter would be particularly helpful to courts and public officials because mentally ill patients are often treated with multiple medications.