Dahl v. State

139 So. 3d 944, 2014 WL 2197622, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 8085
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 28, 2014·No. No. 4D13-1265·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

The patient appeals from the trial court’s order granting the treatment center’s petition to impose involuntary psychotropic treatment upon the patient pursuant to section 916.107(3)(a), Florida Statutes (2013). The patient asserts the trial court erred in entering the order without competent, substantial evidence showing that he received, in writing, an individualized treatment plan which he had an opportunity to assist in preparing as required by section 916.107(2)(d), Florida [945] Statutes (2013). Because the patient’s argument was not preserved below, we affirm the trial court’s order.

Affirmed.

MAY and LEVINE, JJ., concur. WARNER, J., concurs specially with opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Dahl v. State, 139 So. 3d 944, 2014 WL 2197622, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 8085 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

139 So. 3d 944 (Dahl v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Charles Smith v. State
145 So. 3d 189 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)