The requirements of this section, which defines a person with mental danger, are met when medical diagnoses of paranoid schizophrenia and unprovoked attack and threatening behavior are demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence. Lux v. Mental Health Board of Polk County, 202 Neb. 106, 274 N.W.2d 141 (1979). A person who is mentally retarded does not fall within the definition of “person with dangerous mental illness” unless there is a secondary diagnosis of mental illness. In the interest of Wickwire, 259 Neb. 305, 609 N.W.2d 384 (2000). Proof that a person wastes and neglects is not sufficient to prove the dangerousness required by this law. Petersen v County Board of Mental Health, 203 Neb. 622, 279 N.W.2d 844 (1979). To prove the dangerousness of a person with mental illness, as manifested in “Evidence of inability to provide for basic human needs” within the meaning of this section, expert testimony may be used to prove such a condition. In the interest of Kinnebrew, 224 Neb. 885, 402 N.W.2d 264 (1987).
An order assessing a person as a person with a dangerous mental illness under this section and ordering that person to be detained indefinitely is an order that infringes an essential right in a special proceeding against which an appeal may be made. In re Interest of Saville, 10 Neb. App. 194, 626 N.W.2d 644 (2001). (1) A significant risk of serious harm to one or more other persons in the near future, manifested in evidence of recent acts of violence or threats of violence, or in placing other persons in a reasonable apprehension of such harm; or (b) has been found to be sexually dangerous to others by a psychiatrist of the Office. An act taken five years before the hearing on the mental health obligation is new within the meaning of this article, in which: (a) there is evidence that the act is still decisive as to the future dangerousness of the subject; (b) the person concerned has not had the opportunity to commit a more recent act because he or she has been detained; and (c) there is reliable medical evidence that there is a high probability of repetition of such an action by the subject. Under the Mental Health Commitment Act, the determination of the novelty of an act of violence must be decided on the basis of all related facts and circumstances. In re Interest of Blythman, 208 Neb. 51, 302 N.W.2d 666 (1981). If the judge determines that there is probable reason to believe that the person is dangerous and in possession of a firearm, he or she may issue a search and seizure order for the person`s firearms.2 The evidence must be clear and convincing to support the conclusion that a person has a mental and dangerous illness. In the interest of Rasmussen, 236 Neb.
572, 462 N.W.2d 621 (1990). Before a person may be required to be treated by a psychiatric board of appeal, the board must determine that he or she meets the definition of mentally ill and dangerous person as set out herein. In the interest of Verle O., 13 Neb. App. 256, 691 N.W.2d 177 (2005). The state must demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that a person faces a significant risk of harming another person or himself if that person is declared mentally ill and dangerous under the Nebraska Mental Health Commitment Act. In re Interest of Dickson, 238 Neb. 148, 469 N.W.2d 357 (1991). The actions and statements of a person who is allegedly mentally ill and dangerous and that occur before the hearing are evidence of the current mental state of the subject. However, for a past action to have probative value, it must provide a basis for a prediction of future dangerousness and therefore be conclusive for this issue. In the interest of Rasmussen, 236 Neb. 572, 462 N.W.2d 621 (1990).
71-908. Person with mental illness and dangerous, defined. Involuntary engagement as a dangerous person with a mental illness is inappropriate if a person, although clearly mentally ill, is not dangerous. Petersen v County Board of Mental Health, 203 Neb. 622, 279 N.W.2d 844 (1979). (2) A significant risk of serious harm to oneself in the near future, manifested by evidence of recent suicide attempts or threats of suicide or serious bodily harm, or by the inability to meet one`s basic human needs, including food, clothing, housing, basic medical care or personal safety. The definitions of people with dangerous mental illness in the Nebraska Mental Health Commitment Act and the laws for those acquitted of a crime of mental illness are constitutional and do not violate the guarantees of equal protection. Tulloch v. State, 237 Neb. 138, 465 N.W.2d 448 (1991). Adj. Dangerous, dangerous, fraught with risks.
It may be negligence for which a lawsuit may be brought if the damage results from the fact that a dangerous condition that may cause harm to others, a dangerous instrument (any device that may cause damage, including explosives and toxic substances) or a dangerous weapon that is inherently dangerous to anyone handling it or within range of the weapon, is created or left unprotected. An act or threat is “new” within the meaning of this Section if the interval between the act or threat and the hearing of the Mental Health Supervisory Authority is not greater than that which would indicate that the complaint in the existing circumstances was dealt with with due diligence, with due regard to the rights and well-being of the person allegedly mentally ill and the protection of society. generally. Hill v. County Board of Mental Health, Douglas County, 203 Neb. 610, 279 N.W.2d 838 (1979). According to subsection (1) of this article, acts committed more than 10 years before the filing of the application for an obligation may still be so new that they are conclusive on the question of dangerousness if the long detention of the subject prevented him from committing a more recent act and if the subject had not undergone specific treatment for a crime during his detention. In the interest of Michael U., 14 Neb. App. 918, 720 N.W.2d 403 (2006). For the purposes of this Part, “sexually dangerous person” means a person: to meet the definition of a person with a dangerous mental illness, the State must prove that the person suffers from a mental illness and that the person presents a significant risk of harming others or himself. In Kochner`s interest, 266 Neb.
114, 662 N.W.2d 195 (2003). A person with a mental and dangerous disorder is a person who has a mental disorder or a person dependent on a substance and who, as a result of such mental illness or addiction to such a substance, has the following: 1. Requirements of Section 2. Evidentiary issues3. Standard of proof4. Constitutionality5. Call1. Requirements of the section Although this section refers to “recent acts of violence”, the undertaking may be based on evidence of a single act of violence or threat. Lux v. Mental Health Board of Polk County, 202 Neb. 106, 274 N.W.2d 141 (1979).
There is no specific period of time to determine whether an action is new for the purposes of this Section. Each case must be decided on the basis of the facts and circumstances surrounding it. In Kochner`s interest, 266 Neb. 114, 662 N.W.2d 195 (2003). The following pages on government regulations refer to this page.