Opinion filed Jan uary 29, 20 10



### In The 

# Eleven th Court of Appeals

____________ 

### No. 1 1- 09 -0 03 33 -CV

____ ____ __ IN R E T. S.

On App eal from the County Court
How ard County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. M -25900

M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N This is an appea l fro m a judg ment order ing te mporary in-patient mental he alth service s pursuant to T EX
. H EA L TH & S AF ETY C ODE ANN . § 57 4. 03 4 ( Ve rn on 20 03 ). We a ff

ir m. At the commitment hear ing, Big Spring State H ospital St aff Psy chiatrist Dr. Tr ina Cormack te sti fi e d th a t a

pp e lla nt w a s c ur

re ntl y dia g no se d w ithpa

ra no id s c hizo ph re nia

and that hi s d ia g no sis would probably

be cha ng ed to schizoaffe ctive disorder , bi p olar ty pe. Dr . Cormack state d that appellant f

elt that his mother was working ag ainst him, that his mother had too much testosterone in h e r b od

y and ne e de d e str og e n inj e c tio ns , and that he fe lt he ha d too muc h te sto ste ro ne and a lso neede d estrog en injections. Dr. Corma ck desc ribed a ppellant as g randiose a

nd stated appe llant believed himself to be a super hero a nd believed he could fly

. Appellant would walk ar ound wea ring
a ca pe. He would have one hand behind h i s back a nd one hand e x tended in fr ont of his body pr e pa ri ng to “ take of

f. ” Hi s b e havio r w a s in tr us ive to t he oth e r p a tie nts and

to t he sta ff . H isW e note tha t t he bes t f orm , w her e the tr ia l c ourt has f

ound m ulti ple g rounds to suppor t com m itm ent , i s to e nte r s pec if ic 1 indiv idua l f

inding s in t

he conj unct iv e. In re J.S.C. , 812 S .W .2d 92 ( T ex . A pp.—S an Antonio 1991, no w rit ). 2 be havio r w a s c a

us ingoth e r p a tie nts to w ant t o “ be a t hi m up .” Ap pe lla nt had li tt le ability

to communicate “ without constantly talking a bout his delusions.” Appellant testified in his own behalf. He told the t rial cour t that he was “ swell” a

nd that the doctor’s te stimony

was e ntirely

false. H e as k ed the tria l court to consider the doctor’ s testimony perjury and fur ther stated: Your Honor , my

mother has spe n t -- made these a ccusations on me in the pa st. I ha ve g o n e t h r o u g h T e r r e l l

. S h e h a s s e n t m e t o j a i l

. S h e ’ s s e n t m e to j a il be c a us e Ime re ly

did no t c le an th e tub . I

have be e n - - I

have been a

bu se d s e xua lly and ver bally my entire life. I do not -- I do wea r a cape beca

use Ibelieve in the oldschool ty pe of g entleman, espec ially the L ondon ty pe Sherloc k Holmes g entleman, solv in g h is my s te r ie s . A n d th e b ig g e s t my s te r

y o f a ll is th e my s te r

y o f th e B ib le

. And my boisterous voice a

nd b oss talk around the unit is mandate pur e re ligious an e c d o t e an d

- - an d t e s t i m o n y. I , by no means, have thre atene d any one, and I have been attacke d by sever al patie nts on

the un it w ithno me ri t. Th e tr ia l c ourt

fo un d th a t a

pp e lla nt w a s like ly to ca

us e se ri ou s har

m to him se lf

and wa s li ke ly to cause serious har

m to others. The trial c ourt also found that a p p ell ant suffe red se vere and abnorma l mental , em otional, or phy sical distress, that he w as experienc ing substantial menta l or phy sical dete rioration of his ability to function ind ep en d en t l y , and that he w as unable to make a
ratio na l and

inf or me d d e c isi on

c on c e rn ingsu

bmi ssi on to t re a tme nt. 1 I n his sole issue on appea l, appellant conte nds that the evidence is insufficie nt to support the judgme nt of commi t ment. We disag ree . The re cord be fore this court establishes by clea r and
c on vin c inge vid e nc e su ff ic ie nt g ro un ds to s up po rt

the tr ia l c ourt ’s jud g me nt. The judg ment of the trial c ourt is affir med.

PER C URI AM

J anuar y 29, 2010 Panel consists of: Wright, C.J ., M c C a l l , J. , an d

S t r an g e , J.