PETITION FOR DISCHARGE
IV. PETITION FOR DISCHARGE
In re N.S., No. 4-04-0942 (4th Dist. Sept. 7, 2005), 2005 WL 2821816, 2005 Ill. App. LEXIS 1065. The Code requires mental-health facilities to maintain a record of their voluntary admittees' written requests for discharge. 405 ILCS 5/3- 202(a). The written request for discharge itself is always the best evidence such a request has been made.
In re Bates, 315 Ill. App. 3d 736, 734 N.E.2d 459, 248 Ill. Dec. 531 (3rd Dist. 2000). The trial court's order, denying the respondent's petition for discharge, was against the manifest weight of the evidence. Testifying at the trial that she wanted to return home, that she received a monthly benefits check, and that she had not intention of harming anyone, the respondent established a prima facie case for discharge. The State failed to refute the respondent's case by clear and convincing evidence because its expert witness admitted that the respondent was eating and taking care of herself in the hospital and admitted that he did not know if respondent posed a danger to anyone.
In re Yoder, 289 Ill. App. 3d 465, 682 N.E.2d 753, 225 Ill. Dec. 9 (5th Dist. 1997). Having previously been committed, the recipient of services filed a petition for discharge. It was denied, and he appealed. The Appellate Court reiterated the rule that the recipient has the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case for discharge. Here, the recipient failed to meet this burden because his petition was not verified and he did not testify. The trial court's order was reversed, nonetheless, because the trial court improperly refused the recipient's request for an independent examination and his demand for a trial by jury.
In re Wingo, 253 Ill. App. 3d 440, 625 N.E.2d 422, 192 Ill. Dec. 462 (3rd Dist. 1993). In a hearing on a recipient's petition for discharge, the recipient has the burden of presenting a prima facie case. This burden may be satisfied by the recipient's own testimony. The burden then shifts to the State to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the recipient requires inpatient treatment and that the petition should be denied.
In re Smoots, 189 Ill. App. 3d 289, 544 N.E.2d 1235, 136 Ill. Dec. 460 (4th Dist. 1989). Petitioner's prima facie case made for discharge on Petition for Discharge; thereafter burden shifts to State to prove by clear and convincing evidence that petitioner is subject to involuntary admission. 3-901.
In re Katz, 267 Ill. App. 3d 692, 642 N.E.2d 893, 205 111. Dec. 28 (3d Dist. 1994). Mootness does not apply notwithstanding respondent's discharge approximately 6 weeks after hearing denying petition for discharge. Where respondent failed to present prima facie case, no 3-810 report is necessary, However, respondent's request in petition for discharge for appointment of an independent examiner and continuance for that purpose was erroneously refused.
Brelje v. Pates, 99 Ill. App. 3d 847, 426 N.E.2d 275, 55 Ill. Dec. 300 (5th Dist. 1981). In petition for discharge hearing, respondent must allege that expert is partial and somehow involved in initial admission, helped prepare treatment plan or full-time employee of DMHDD; only required that expert be impartial, thus 3-804 does not exclude examination by state-employed expert. Unfair for counties where facilities located to bear cost of independent examinations for patients who request discharge.