FRANK v. CAROL
Filed 8/5/10 Certified for publication 9/2/10 (order attached)
IN THE COURT OF
APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE
DISTRICT
(Sacramento)
----
Conservatorship
of the Person and Estate of CAROL K.
C061006
LYNN FRANK, as Public Guardian,
etc.,
Petitioner and Respondent,
v.
CAROL K.,
Objector and Appellant.
(Super.
Ct. No. 07PR00230)
STORY CONTINUE FROM
PART I….
Carol agreed she has a mental disorder consisting of anxiety
and depression. When asked how she got
the mental disorder, Carol stated she wanted to be a doctor, described her
dating experience, and testified she had suffered from complete amnesia. Ultimately, she testified she had a nervous
breakdown, which caused her mental illness.
Carol conceded she
could use help in getting back on her own, but all she needed to find shelter
was a phone and a newspaper. She had
problems getting shelter in the past and made some â€
| Description | Once again, we confront a familiar and moral/legal dilemma that the Legislature has attempted to resolve: when should the state intervene to care for the nondangerous mentally ill? This dilemma pits our belief in individual liberties against our desire to protect the helpless, incapacitated individual in need of immediate assistance. Here, a jury found defendant, 62-year-old Carol K., gravely disabled beyond a reasonable doubt. The court appointed the public guardian to act as Carol's conservator under the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (LPS Act; Welf. & Inst. Code, § 5000 et seq.). The court ordered Carol placed in a locked skilled nursing facility as the least restrictive placement. Carol appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support a finding that she is gravely disabled and cannot obtain food, clothing, or shelter. Court shall affirm the judgment. |
| Rating |
