Conservatorship of Bobby H. CA1/3
Filed 6/21/22 Conservatorship of Bobby H. CA1/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
Conservatorship of the Person of Bobby H.
PUBLIC GUARDIAN OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, A162705 Petitioner and Respondent, (Contra Costa County v. Super. Ct. No. P1901213) Bobby H., Objector and Appellant.
Bobby H. appeals from a trial court order reestablishing a conservatorship over his person under the Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 5000 et seq.1). He contends the evidence was insufficient to support (1) the jury’s determination that he is gravely disabled and (2) the court’s determination that a locked facility was the least restrictive placement for him. While this appeal was pending, the Public Guardian of Contra Costa County (Public Guardian) filed a new petition for reappointment of a
1 All further statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise indicated.
1
conservator. A trial date has now been set. Because of these events, the Public Guardian argues the appeal should be dismissed as moot. We agree and dismiss the appeal. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In February 2021, the Public Guardian filed a petition seeking reappointment as conservator for Bobby H. After a trial in May 2021, a jury found that Bobby H. was gravely disabled due to a mental disorder. On May 17, 2021, the trial court issued the reappointment order and determined a locked facility was the least restrictive placement for Bobby H. Bobby H. appealed. While this appeal was pending, the Public Guardian filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. In sum, the Public Guardian contends that Bobby H.’s challenge to the earlier jury verdict and the court’s locked facility determination has been rendered moot because another petition for reappointment of a conservator had been filed on February 10, 2022, and a court trial for that petition was set for May 9, 2022.2 DISCUSSION Under the LPS Act, “[a] conservator of the person . . . may be appointed for a person who is gravely disabled as a result of a mental health disorder . . . .” (§ 5350.) A person is considered “ ‘gravely disabled’ ” when he
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)