In re E.M.D.Y.
Date Filed2022-12-16
Docket279A21
Cited0 times
StatusPublished
Syllabus
Whether the trial judge violated respondent's due process right to an impartial tribunal in an involuntary commitment proceeding by calling a witness and eliciting testimony to support committing respondent when counsel for the State did not appear.
Full Opinion (html_with_citations)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA
2022-NCSC-126
No. 279A21
Filed 16 December 2022
IN THE MATTER OF E.M.D.Y.
Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from an unpublished decision of a
divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 278 N.C. App. 604, 2021-NCCOA-365,
remanding an order entered on 15 May 2020 by Judge Pat Evans in District Court,
Durham County. On 21 July 2022, this Court allowed the motion of respondent in In
re J.R., 2022-NCSC-127, to consolidate these cases for oral argument. Heard in the
Supreme Court on 20 September 2022.
Glenn Gerding, Appellate Defender, by Jillian C. Katz, Assistant Appellate
Defender, for respondent-appellant.
Joshua H. Stein, Attorney General, by South A. Moore, General Counsel Fellow,
and James W. Doggett, Deputy Solicitor General, for the State.
Disability Rights North Carlina, by Lisa Grafstein, Holly Stiles, and
Elizabeth Myerholtz for Disability Rights North Carolina, National
Association of Social Workers, Promise Resource Network, and Peer Voice
North Carolina, amicus curiae.
PER CURIAM.
¶1 For the reasons stated in In re J.R., 2022-NCSC-127, the decision of the Court
of Appeals is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
Justices HUDSON, MORGAN, and EARLS dissent for the reasons stated in
IN RE E.M.D.Y.
2022-NCSC-126
Opinion of the Court
Justice Earls’ dissenting opinion in In re J.R., 2022-NCSC-127.