M.D.C. v. State of Alabama

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 09/21/2012 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS SPECIAL TERM, 2012 2071224 M.D.C. v. S t a t e o f Alabama Appeal from Tuscaloosa J u v e n i l e Court (JU-04-658.18) MOORE, J u d g e . M.D.C. a p p e a l s Court from a judgment o f t h e T u s c a l o o s a ("the j u v e n i l e court") dismissing a Juvenile petition for 2071224 M.D.C.'s i n v o l u n t a r y commitment affirm. f i l e d b y h i s m o t h e r , K.C. We 1 On o r a b o u t M a r c h 8, 2008, M.D.C. was a c c u s e d o f s h o o t i n g and killing 11, 2008, t h e S t a t e in J.D.F. the juvenile with a s e m i - a u t o m a t i c handgun. On M a r c h o f A l a b a m a moved t o t r a n s f e r p r o c e e d i n g s court i n v o l v i n g M.D.C. t o c r i m i n a l court, p u r s u a n t t o § 12-15-34, A l a . Code 1975; t h a t r e q u e s t was f i l e d u n d e r c a s e no. JU-04-658.17. On M a r c h 13, 2008, M.D.C.'s m o t h e r , K.C. ("the m o t h e r " ) , filed i n the j u v e n i l e court commitment 04-658.18. a petition f o r the involuntary o f M.D.C.; t h a t p e t i t i o n was a s s i g n e d c a s e no. J U - The m o t h e r a s s e r t e d i n h e r p e t i t i o n t h a t M.D.C. i s T h e c a s e was i n i t i a l l y a p p e a l e d t o t h e C o u r t o f C r i m i n a l A p p e a l s ; t h a t c o u r t t r a n s f e r r e d t h e a p p e a l t o t h i s c o u r t on S e p t e m b e r 29, 2008. A f t e r r e v i e w i n g M.D.C.'s b r i e f on a p p e a l , see C l a n c y v . S t a t e , [Ms. CR-10-1228, M a r c h 2 3 , 2012] So. 3d ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2012) ( n o t i n g t h a t a t r a n s f e r h e a r i n g a r i s e s out o f a delinquency proceeding, which i s c r i m i n a l i n n a t u r e , w h i l e an i n v o l u n t a r y - c o m m i t m e n t h e a r i n g i s a c i v i l m a t t e r ) , t h i s c o u r t d e t e r m i n e d t h a t M.D.C.'s a r g u m e n t s were more p r o p e r l y p r e s e n t e d t o t h e C o u r t o f C r i m i n a l A p p e a l s , a n d , t h u s , we t r a n s f e r r e d t h e c a s e b a c k t o t h a t c o u r t f o r l a c k o f s u b j e c t - m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n on O c t o b e r 2 3 , 2008. On December 11, 2008, t h e C o u r t o f C r i m i n a l A p p e a l s r e q u e s t e d t h a t t h e a p p e a l be t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e A l a b a m a Supreme C o u r t . On J u l y 30, 2009, t h e A l a b a m a Supreme C o u r t o r d e r e d t h a t t h e c a s e be transferred t o that court. On A u g u s t 15, 2 0 1 2 , t h e supreme c o u r t e n t e r e d an o r d e r t r a n s f e r r i n g t h e a p p e a l t o t h i s c o u r t . 1 2 2071224 "mentally i l l and poses a real and p r e s e n t s u b s t a n t i a l harm t o h i m s e l f o r o t h e r s . " among o t h e r things, She f u r t h e r threat of asserted, that "[M.D.C.] h a s a l o n g h i s t o r y o f o u t o f c o n t r o l b e h a v i o r s , t r o u b l e c o n t r o l l i n g h i s anger and t r o u b l e sleeping. W h i l e i n S o u t h e r n Oaks C e n t e r i n A u g u s t 2007, he h a d m e d i c a t i o n p r e s c r i b e d f o r him f o r m e n t a l h e a l t h i s s u e s ; h o w e v e r , when he was r e l e a s e d the f a m i l y was n o t g i v e n any p r e s c r i p t i o n s f o r [M.D.C.], t h e r e f o r e , [M.D.C.] i s n o t c u r r e n t l y t a k i n g any m e d i c a t i o n s . Several o f [M.D.C.]'s f a m i l y members s u f f e r f r o m m e n t a l h e a l t h i s s u e s . On o r a b o u t M a r c h 8, 2008, [M.D.C.] a l l e g e d l y c a u s e d t h e d e a t h o f [J.D.F.] b y s h o o t i n g h i m m u l t i p l e t i m e s w i t h a s e m i - a u t o m a t i c handgun. [M.D.C.] i s c u r r e n t l y p l a c e d i n t h e Tuscaloosa County J u v e n i l e Detention F a c i l i t y a n d i s p r e s e n t l y on s u i c i d e w a t c h . [M.D.C.] has p r e v i o u s l y u n d e r g o n e a p s y c h o l o g i c a l e v a l u a t i o n t h a t i n d i c a t e d t h a t [M.D.C.] s u f f e r s f r o m m e n t a l health issues." The j u v e n i l e court appointing Cheryl Stahl scheduling a hearing f o r M a r c h 14, 2008. submitted excerpts entered an o r d e r as M.D.C.'s on t h e S t a t e ' s on M a r c h 13, 2008, guardian ad l i t e m and and t h e mother's motions At that hearing, t h e guardian ad l i t e m o f a 2006 p s y c h o l o g i c a l e v a l u a t i o n t h a t h a d b e e n p e r f o r m e d on M.D.C. a n d r e q u e s t e d t h a t t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t order a addressing new psychological the State's evaluation transfer 3 request. of M.D.C. before M.D.C.'s defense 2071224 attorney submitted t h e 2006 p s y c h o l o g i c a l evaluation as an exhibit. Monte P e t e r s e n , M.D.C.'s p r o b a t i o n o f f i c e r , who t e s t i f i e d with regard t o only the State's motion t o t r a n s f e r , t e s t i f i e d that M.D.C. h a d been According t o Petersen, rehabilitative times i n the court as p a r t efforts, i n Thomasville system since of the probation M.D.C. h a d been Boot July Camp; Camp placed Cobia, g r o u p home; T e e n U n i v e r s i t y , w h i c h i s a l s o a 2004. office's at various therapeutic called New L i f e C e n t e r f o r Change; a n d S o u t h e r n Oaks C e n t e r , a g r o u p home f o r boys. The m o t h e r t e s t i f i e d a t t h e h e a r i n g t h a t , when M.D.C. h a d been r e l e a s e d f r o m S o u t h e r n Oaks, s h e h a d r e c e i v e d a t e l e p h o n e call and l e a r n e d depression, that M.D.C. was s u f f e r i n g f r o m s t r e s s a n d t h a t he h a d n o t been s l e e p i n g w e l l , a n d t h a t he had been p r e s c r i b e d Z o l o f t a n d a n o t h e r m e d i c a t i o n . She s t a t e d t h a t , s i n c e he h a d r e t u r n e d home, M.D.C. h a d been s a y i n g he was r e a d y t o d i e a n d k i l l well, himself, a n d h a d n o t h a d a good a p p e t i t e . t h a t M.D.C. h a d been w a l k i n g that h a d n o t been sleeping The m o t h e r testified a r o u n d t h e house w i t h h i s head down a n d t h a t he s o m e t i m e s w o u l d s i t " l i k e h e ' s j u s t i n o u t e r 4 2071224 space." danger She s t a t e d t h a t s h e was c o n c e r n e d t h a t he w o u l d be a to himself or t o others. members o f h e r f a m i l y According t o t h e mother, s u f f e r from m e n t a l - h e a l t h i s s u e s and, b a s e d on h e r a n d o t h e r members o f h e r f a m i l y ' s d i a g n o s e s , s h e was c o n c e r n e d a b o u t M.D.C.'s b e h a v i o r s . The m o t h e r testified t h a t M.D.C. was n o t on a n y m e d i c a t i o n s t o a d d r e s s a n y m e n t a l h e a l t h i s s u e s a n d t h a t he h a d n o t b e e n on a n y s u c h m e d i c a t i o n s since h i s release mother also mental-health and that from testified Southern that Oaks i n August she had n o t taken treatment since h i s release s h e was aware t h a t , on stating, based i n pertinent on t h e P e t i t i o n , dismissed as t h e f a c e demonstrate that sheet part: also i n case "[B]ased no. J U - 0 4 - 6 5 8 . 1 8 , Apparently, 5 the P e t i t i o n i s and t h e testimony i s totally t r a n s f e r r e d the c r i m i n a l aspect an o r d e r on t h e e v i d e n c e a n d of the P e t i t i o n the Petition he facility. entered I T I S ORDERED t h a t (Capitalization i noriginal.) M.D.C. f o r a t t h e time o f t h e hearing, 14, 2008, t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t t h e case-action-summary The f r o m S o u t h e r n Oaks was on s u i c i d e w a t c h i n t h e j u v e n i l e - d e t e n t i o n On M a r c h 2007. without merit." thej u v e n i l e court of the proceedings 2071224 i.e., JU-04-658.17 -- t o t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t . (M.D.C.'s b r i e f , p. 3.) On M a r c h 25, 2008, M.D.C. a p p e a l e d t h e d i s m i s s a l petition Appeals. for involuntary That c o u r t S e p t e m b e r 29, 2008. of the commitment t o t h e C o u r t o f C r i m i n a l transferred the appeal t o t h i s c o u r t on As we s t a t e d i n n o t e 1, s u p r a , t h e a p p e a l was t r a n s f e r r e d back t o t h e Court o f C r i m i n a l Appeals and then to t h e Alabama Supreme t r a n s f e r r e d back t o t h i s In "Did for M.D.C.'s b r i e f court o f case review stated before ultimately on A u g u s t 15, on a p p e a l , the [ j u v e n i l e court] transfer Court to criminal 2012. M.D.C. r a i s e s err i ngranting court." i n M.D.C.'s a p p e l l a t e being one i s s u e : the State's motion The s t a n d a r d o f b r i e f speaks o n l y to the t r a n s f e r o f t h e c r i m i n a l aspect o f t h e case from t h e j u v e n i l e court t o thec i r c u i t court for d i s p o s i t i o n . overwhelming majority o f M.D.C.'s Additionally,the argument on a p p e a l i s d e d i c a t e d t o the t r a n s f e r o f the c r i m i n a l aspect o f the case, rather than t o t h e d i s m i s s a l o f t h e mother's p e t i t i o n f o r t h e involuntary See 3d commitment o f M.D.C., w h i c h i s c i v i l C l a n c y v. S t a t e , [Ms. CR-10-1228, M a r c h 23, i n nature. 2012] ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2012) ( n o t i n g t h a t a t r a n s f e r 6 So. hearing 2071224 a r i s e s out o f a delinquency proceeding, which nature, while an i n v o l u n t a r y - c o m m i t m e n t i s criminal i n hearing i sa civil matter). The Court S t a t e o f Alabama f i l e d i t s a p p e l l e e ' s b r i e f w i t h t h e of Criminal Appeals on November 13, 2008. In that b r i e f , the S t a t e a s s e r t e d t h a t , because the appeal arose from c a s e no. JU-04-658.18 and, t h u s , r e l a t e d o n l y t o t h e d e n i a l o f the mother's p e t i t i o n the criminal this o f t h e case, t o t h e motion the appeal to transfer should lie in c o u r t r a t h e r t h a n i n t h e C o u r t o f C r i m i n a l A p p e a l s . The State also has aspect r a t h e r than questioned i n i t s b r i e f standing t o appeal the denial on a p p e a l w h e t h e r M.D.C. o f t h e mother's petition because, i t a s s e r t s , the v e r y nature o f the mother's p e t i t i o n is a d v e r s a r i a l t o M.D.C. "A party that i s not aggrieved by a trial court's judgment l a c k s s t a n d i n g t o a p p e a l from t h a t judgment, and t h i s court lacks jurisdiction F o r d , 93 So. 3 d 99, over such an a p p e a l . " 103 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2011) . Edwards v . Involuntary- commitment c a s e s a r i s e i n an " a d v e r s a r y c o n t e x t . " Christian, 419 So. 2d 249, Dunson v . 251 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 8 2 ) . In the present case, t h e d i s m i s s a l o f t h e p e t i t i o n t o i n v o l u n t a r i l y 7 2071224 commit M.D.C. was d e t e r m i n e d i n M.D.C.'s f a v o r . outcome d i d n o t a g g r i e v e M.D.C. Thus, t h e A s a r e s u l t , we c o n c l u d e that M.D.C. does n o t have s t a n d i n g t o a p p e a l t h e d i s m i s s a l o f t h e mother's petition. Although t h e arguments on appeal p r e d o m i n a n t l y p e r t a i n t o t h e t r a n s f e r o r d e r , as n o t e d b y t h e State, the d i s m i s s a l of the involuntary-commitment petition i s t h e o n l y m a t t e r b e f o r e t h i s c o u r t i n t h e a p p e a l f r o m c a s e no. JU-04-658.18. Thus, b e c a u s e M.D.C. l a c k s dismiss t h i s appeal. s t a n d i n g , we must See G o o d y e a r T i r e & R u b b e r Co. v . Moore, 900 So. 2d 1239, 1240 ( A l a . C i v . A p p . 2 0 0 4 ) . APPEAL DISMISSED. Thompson, P.J., and P i t t m a n , concur. 8 Bryan, a n d Thomas, J J . ,

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.