Ex parte Roberts, Motion No. 380.
| Decision Date | 20 February 1945 |
| Docket Number | Motion No. 380. |
| Citation | 310 Mich. 560,17 N.W.2d 752 |
| Parties | Ex parte ROBERTS. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Habeas corpus proceeding to inquire into the cause of detention of Harold H. Roberts.
Release granted.
Before the Entire Bench.
No appearances.
On petition of Amanda Roberts, we issued writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of the detention of her son, Harold H. Roberts, in the Kalamazoo State hospital. As copies of all orders and proceedings relating to his commitment by the probate court of Kalamazoo county were attached to such petition, the usual ancillary writ of certiorari was not issued.
It appears that on June 9, 1944, the father of said Harold Roberts filed petition in probate court for his admission to the Kalamazoo State hospital as an insane person. On that date an emergency order was entered committing him to the hospital, pending hearing on the petition. At the conclusion of the hearing on June 16th, an order was entered committing him to the State hospital as an insane person. Roberts was not present at such hearing, as he was confined in the hospital under the emergency commitment. There was no showing to the court that his condition was such as to render his removal from the hospital for the purpose of appearing at the hearing improper and unsafe, as required by 2 Comp.Laws 1929, § 6888 as last amended by Act No. 250, Pub.Acts 1943 (Comp.Laws Supp.1943, § 6888, Stat.Ann. 1944 Cum.Supp. § 14.811), which provides in part:
‘Such alleged mentally diseased person shall have the right to be present at such hearing, unless it shall be made to appear to the court, either by the certificate of the medical superintendent in charge of such hospital, home or retreat to which he may have been temporarily admitted, or by the certificate of 2 reputable physicians, that his condition is such as to render his removal for that purpose, or his appearing at such hearing improper and unsafe.’
Under the above statute Roberts was entitled to be present at the hearing unless it was shown to the court that his condition was such as to render his removal from the hospital for that purpose improper and unsafe. The provisions of the statute are mandatory, and as they were not complied with, the probate court was without jurisdiction to commit him as an insane person. In the case of In re Phillips, 158 Mich. 155, 159, 122 N.W. 554, 556, we said:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. Dalton, 12443.
... ... 566, 55 N.W.2d 96; In re Roberts, 1945, 310 Mich. 560, 17 N.W.2d 752, where the evidence "did not in any ... ...
-
Daniel Ing v. Eddins (In re Eddins)
...over commitment of an insane person depended upon strict compliance with all applicable statutory requirements. Ex parte Roberts, 310 Mich. 560, 562; 17 N.W.2d 752 (1945). A few years later, our Supreme Court expressly held that the probate court lacked jurisdiction over the involuntary com......
-
McKinney, In re
...40 N.W.2d 114 ... 326 Mich. 190 ... In re McKINNEY ... Motion" No. 151 ... Supreme Court of Michigan ... Dec. 7, 1949 ... \xC2" ... 512, 227 N.W. 754; In re Davis, 277 Mich. 88, 268 N.W. 822; In re Roberts, 310 Mich. 560, 17 N.W.2d 752; In re Sawyer, 311 Mich. 602, 19 N.W.2d 113 ... ...
-
Ex parte Fuller, 14
...55 N.W.2d 96 ... 334 Mich. 566 ... Ex parte FULLER ... Motion No. 14 ... Supreme Court of Michigan ... Oct. 6, 1952 ... Before the Entire ... In the case of In re Roberts, 310 Mich. 560, 17 N.W.2d 752, 753, a petition for a writ of habeas corpus was filed by the mother ... ...