In Re Gavin

THE COURT.

The petitioner, by a judge of the superior court of' the city and county of San Francisco, was committed to the state hospital for the insane at Napa, state of California, by an order of commitment, dated the twenty-seventh day of October, 1919, and has applied to this court by way of a petition for a writ of

habeas corpus,

to be released from restraint under said commitment and ordered discharged.

The commitment, among other things, recites: That the court, being satisfied from the testimony of the witnesses and of the proof of the matter set forth in the certificate, that said Michael Gavin is insane and so disordered in mind as to endanger health, person, and property and that it is dangerous to life, health, person, and property for such person to be at large, and that his condition is such as requires care and treatment in a hospital for the care and treatment of the insane, commitment therefore ordered.

The record presented to us upon this hearing discloses that an examination of the present mental condition of the petitioner was recently had at a conference of the physicians constituting the medical staff of the Napa state hospital and, also, of an application made by the petitioner to the superior court of the county of Napa for release on

habeas

corpus, and the testimony taken in both of said hearings

[29]

is presented to us by way of stipulation of counsel for our consideration. This record shows that the petitioner some years prior to his commitment to the state hospital at Napa had at different times been committed to the state hospital at Stockton, subsequently discharged therefrom and, also, committed to the state hospital at Mendocino and subsequently discharged therefrom. The record in both of said previous commitments set forth that the applicant was suffering from mental deterioration superinduced by alcoholism, his condition being associated with what is called “Arterial sclerosis.”

The record shows that the medical staff of the Napa state hospital was willing to grant the applicant a leave of absence, provided some friend or relative would obligate himself to become responsible for the applicant and to take such supervision of him as would prevent the applicant from becoming a menace either to himself, to others, or, in anywise, injurious to life or property; that no relative or friend has consented to become so responsible for the applicant. Upon the hearing before this court oral testimony was taken, which testimony was to the effect that, if granted a leave of absence from said hospital, the applicant was in such a mental condition as not to be able to take care of himself, being more or less irresponsible, and should at all times be under the supervision of someone, who would be able to guard him. with the same degree of care that is exercised over patients at the Napa state hospital. The testimony introduced in this ease further shows that for a period of about one month during this year the applicant was absent from the Napa state hospital, having left the same without permission, and that his return to the hospital was necessitated by a condition alleged to be that of alcoholism.