The following excerpt is from Charles W., et al. v. Maul, et al., 214 F.3d 350 (2nd Cir. 1998):
Moreover, as we observed in Goetz v. Crosson, 41 F.3d 800, 804 n.1 (2d Cir. 1994), the issues presented at a commitment hearing are more complex than those presented at a competency hearing. The state will not necessarily be prepared to undertake civil commitment proceedings immediately after criminal charges are dismissed. Finally, civil commitments are generally initiated by someone outside the mental health system. When the initiator is a member of the patient's family, his physician, or friend, rather than the criminal justice system, more useful diagnostic information may be readily available to the state at the outset of the evaluation period.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.