In Re: J.R. (memorandum)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
J-A06030-13 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: J.R., Appellee APPEAL OF J.R. No. 1306 EDA 2012 Appeal from the Order entered April 4, 2012, in the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County, Civil Division at No(s): 2011-40158 BEFORE: PANELLA, ALLEN, and PLATT*, JJ. MEMORANDUM BY ALLEN, J.: Filed: March 15, 2013 J.R., ( Appellant ), appeals from the trial court s order denying his petition to vacate and expunge involuntary civil commitment. After careful review, we affirm. On June 20, 2007, the Pennsylvania State Police were called to Appellant s residence after Appellant s wife reported that he had called a suicide hotline and subsequently attempted to shoot himself. The police transported Appellant to Grand View Hospital where Appellant s wife initiated his involuntary commitment pursuant to section 302 of the Mental Health Procedures Act. 50 P.S. ยง 7302. As a result, Appellant was involuntarily committed to emergency examination and treatment. Several years later, on May 20, 2011, Appellant filed a petition to vacate and expunge involuntary commitment. The Pennsylvania State Police *Retired Senior Judge assigned to Superior Court. J-A06030-13 filed an answer and new matter on July 11, 2011. The trial court directed the parties to file briefs, and after consideration of the briefs and the record as stipulated by the parties, denied Appellant s petition on April 4, 2012. Appellant filed this timely appeal, and the trial court and Appellant have complied with Pa.R.A.P. 1925. Appellant asserts that the trial court abused its discretion and committed an error of law by failing to expunge his involuntary civil commitment where: the evidence did not support his commitment because he was not examined within two hours of arrival at the hospital; his Fourth Amendment right to be free of seizure and arrest was violated when he was locked in a room of the hospital for five to six hours; and Appellant admitted himself voluntarily. Appellant s Brief at ii-iii. Appellant additionally contends that expungement is warranted because his reputation has been tarnished. Id. He also argues that he was denied constitutional due process and lost his Second Amendment right to bear firearms, where no pre- or postdeprivation hearing was provided. Id. We generally review decisions on expungement matters for an abuse of discretion. Commonwealth v. Wolfe, 749 A.2d 507, 509 (Pa. Super. 2000). Here, we find no abuse of discretion in the present case. We have heard oral argument, and reviewed the record, the parties briefs, and applicable law, as well as the comprehensive trial court opinion in this matter. Upon review, we conclude that the Honorable Albert J. Cepparulo, sitting as the trial court, did not abuse his discretion or commit an error of -2- J-A06030-13 law in denying Appellant s expungement petition. Moreover, Judge Cepparulo has ably and thoroughly addressed Appellant s appellate issues such that further analysis by this Court would be redundant. In his Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a) opinion, Judge Cepparulo analyzed Appellant s claims and correctly determined that: 1.) Appellant was examined within two hours of arriving at the hospital; 2.) Appellant did not request nor was he voluntarily admitted to the hospital; 3.) Appellant s right to reputation does not warrant expungement; 4.) Appellant s Fourth Amendment right to be free of unlawful seizure and arrest and his right to substantive due process was not violated. Given the foregoing, we adopt Judge Cepparulo s opinion as our own, and in doing so, affirm the trial court s order. Order affirmed. -3-
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.
