West Virginia § 27-5-3a Legal effect of commitment after determined not to be based on mental illness or addiction

West Virginia Statutes

§ 27-5-3a — Legal effect of commitment after determined not to be based on mental illness or addiction

West Virginia § 27-5-3a

Ch. 27MENTALLY ILL PERSONS

Art. 5INVOLUNTARY HOSPITALIZATION

This text of West Virginia § 27-5-3a (Legal effect of commitment after determined not to be based on mental illness or addiction) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering West Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

W. Va. Code § 27-5-3a (2026).

Text

(a)In the event that a person is involuntarily hospitalized, and it is determined after the entry of the order that the behavior which led to the entry of the order of involuntary hospitalization was caused by a physical condition or disorder rather than mental illness or addiction, the hospitalization shall not serve to make him or her a proscribed person under state laws relating to firearms possession or to negatively affect a person’s professional licensure, employment, employability, or parental rights. Furthermore, while it is clear that it is the government of the United States and not the government of West Virginia, which has authority under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(4), to determine whether a person has been “committed to a mental institution” the Legislature notes that “federal courts o

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

(a) In the event that a person is involuntarily hospitalized, and it is determined after the entry of the order that the behavior which led to the entry of the order of involuntary hospitalization was caused by a physical condition or disorder rather than mental illness or addiction, the hospitalization shall not serve to make him or her a proscribed person under state laws relating to firearms possession or to negatively affect a person’s professional licensure, employment, employability, or parental rights. Furthermore, while it is clear that it is the government of the United States and not the government of West Virginia, which has authority under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(4), to determine whether a person has been “committed to a mental institution” the Legislature notes that “federal courts often look to state law to help determine whether a commitment has occurred.”United States v. Vertz, 40 F. App’x 69 (6thCir. 2002). Under such principles of interpretation, it is the express intent of the legislature to make clear that in circumstances under which there is a judicial determination that a person’s involuntary hospitalization was necessitated and ordered as a result of a physical condition or disorder, the legislature does not deem this to be a “commitment,” under state law, and the Legislature’s determination that such an involuntary hospitalization is not a “commitment” should be viewed by the government of the United States as consistent with the provisions of the amendments to the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007, Public Law 110-180, Tit. 1, Sec 101(c)(1), 121 Stat. 2559, 2562-63 (2008).

(b) Consistent with subsection (a) of this section, whenever a mental hygiene commissioner, magistrate, or circuit judge is made aware that the circumstances addressed in subsection (a) of this section have occurred, the mental hygiene commissioner, magistrate, or circuit judge shall enter an order finding that the person was not suffering from a mental illness or addiction and not committed therefor.