DA 07-0644

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

2008 MT 450

IN THE MATTER OF THE

MENTAL HEALTH OF

A.S.F.,

 Respondent and Appellant.

APPEAL FROM: District Court of the First Judicial District,

In and For the County of Lewis and Clark, Cause No. ADI 2007-65

Honorable Dorothy McCarter, Presiding Judge

COUNSEL OF RECORD:

For Appellant:

Jim Wheelis, Chief Appellate Defender; Roberta R. Zenker, Assistant 

Appellate Defender, Helena, Montana

For Appellee:

Hon. Mike McGrath, Montana Attorney General; John Paulson, Assistant 

Attorney General, Helena, Montana

Leo J. Gallagher, Lewis and Clark County Attorney; Mike Menahan, Deputy 

County Attorney, Helena, Montana

Submitted on Briefs: September 3, 2008

 Decided: December 30, 2008

Filed:

__________________________________________

Clerk

Justice John Warner delivered the Opinion of the Court.

December 30 2008
2

¶1 A.S.F. appeals from a judgment involuntarily committing her to the Montana State 

Hospital (MSH), entered in the First Judicial District Court, Lewis and Clark County. A.S.F. 

raises several issues. However, because we conclude the District Court erred in not 

appointing a friend for A.S.F., as required by § 53-21-122(2), MCA, we need not discuss 

other issues.

¶2 On September 6, 2007, A.S.F., who had on a previous occasion been diagnosed with 

schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, was arrested and charged with burglary, criminal 

trespass, and theft. A professional person, Donald Bell (Bell) was called to the detention 

center to evaluate A.S.F. on September 16. After his evaluation, Bell recommended A.S.F. 

be admitted to MSH for evaluation and treatment before being returned to the community. 

Bell opined that A.S.F. was at risk of harm or injury to herself because she entered other 

people’s residences uninvited, and because she lacked the insight and impulse control 

necessary to keep herself safe. 

¶3 The State filed a petition for the involuntary commitment of A.S.F. The court’s order 

setting a hearing did not appoint a friend for A.S.F. as required by statute. At the hearing on 

the petition, no friend appeared on behalf of A.S.F. On October 5, the District Court ordered 

the commitment of A.S.F. to MSH for ninety days. 

¶4 A.S.F. argues for the first time on appeal that the District Court’s failure to appoint a 

friend deprived her of her fundamental liberty interest, which is a miscarriage of justice and 

compromises the integrity of the judicial process. A.S.F. thus urges us to review the issue 

under the plain error doctrine and reverse the judgment of commitment. 
3

¶5 A.S.F. did not object to the lack of the appointment of a friend in the District Court. 

Generally, this Court will not hear issues raised for the first time on appeal. However, when 

constitutional or substantial rights are at issue, we may review any errors under “our inherent 

power and paramount obligation to interpret Montana’s Constitution and to protect the 

various rights set forth in that document.” State v. Finley, 276 Mont. 126, 137, 915 P.2d 

208, 215 (1996), overruled on other grounds, State v. Gallagher, 2001 MT 39, 304 Mont. 

215, 19 P.3d 817. We will invoke plain error review sparingly and only in those limited 

situations where failure to review the alleged error may result in a manifest miscarriage of 

justice or compromise the integrity of the judicial process. State v. Adgerson, 2003 MT 284, 

¶ 13, 318 Mont. 22, ¶ 13, 78 P.3d 850, ¶ 13. 

¶6 In Matter of J.D.L., 2008 MT 445, ___ Mont. ___, ___ P.3d ___, recently decided, the 

Court concluded it will exercise plain error review when the respondent in a mental 

commitment proceeding is not appointed a friend because a substantial right--liberty--is at 

stake and our failure to review the alleged error would compromise the integrity of the 

judicial process. Matter of J.D.L., ¶ 9.

¶7 Section 53-21-122(2), MCA, provides “[t]he judge shall appoint . . . a friend of 

respondent . . . .” Here, no friend was appointed by the judge as required. There is nothing 

in the record indicating the District Court even considered the requirement that it appoint a 

friend for A.S.F. The State urges us to excuse the District Court’s error because neither 

party suggested anyone willing and able to serve as the court-appointed friend. Regardless 

of whether the parties suggest someone to serve as a friend, the District Court has a statutory 
4

responsibility to make such an appointment. The record here shows the District Court 

completely ignored the statutory mandate. Under these circumstances, we conclude 

reversible error exists. 

¶8 This case is remanded to the District Court for entry of an order vacating its order and 

judgment of October 5, 2007, committing A.S.F. to the Montana State Hospital. 

/S/ JOHN WARNER

We Concur:

/S/ JAMES C. NELSON

/S/ PATRICIA COTTER

/S/ W. WILLIAM LEAPHART

/S/ BRIAN MORRIS

Chief Justice Karla M. Gray, specially concurring.

¶9 For the reasons expressed in my concurring opinion in Matter of J.D.L., 2008 MT 

445, ___ Mont. ___, ____P.3d ___, I join in the result the Court reaches and invite the 

Legislature’s attention to the statutes at issue.

 /S/ KARLA M. GRAY

Justice Jim Rice, dissenting. 

¶10 I dissent from the Court’s exercise of plain error appellate review for the same 

reasons as expressed in my dissent in Matter of J.D.L. I would affirm.
5

/S/ JIM RICE