IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 14

- 0760 Filed February 11, 2015 IN THE MATTER OF C.I.T., Alleged to be Seriously Mentally Impaired, C.I.T., Respondent

- Appellant.

________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Nancy A. Baumgartner , Judge.

C.I.T. appeals the district court ruling he is serious ly mental ly impaired and
in need of an involuntar y committ al

. AFFIRMED.

Sandra R. Hart, North Liberty, for appellant. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Gretchen Witte Kraemer, Assistant Attorney General, Janet M. Lyness, County Attorney, and Kristin L. Parks, Assistant County Attorney, f or appellee.

Considered by Mullins, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.2

BOWER, J. C.I.T. 1 appeals the distri ct court ruling he is serious ly mental ly impair ed
and in need of an involuntar y committ al

. We review challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence in involuntary commitment proceedings for errors at law. In re
J.P. , 574 N.W.2d 340, 342 (Iowa 1998). The allegations made in an application
for an involuntary commi t t al must be proven by clear and convincing evidence.
Id. Clear and convincing evidence is less burdensome than evidence establishing proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but more burdensome than a preponderance of the evidence. Id. “It means that there must be no serious or
substantial d oubt about the correctness of a particular conclusion drawn from the evidence.” Id. (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). C

. I

. T

. claims the State has not shown by clear and convincing evidence he is “seriously mentally impaired.” ‘Seriously m entally impaired’ or ‘serious mental impairment’ describes the condition of a person with mental illness and because of that illness lacks sufficient judgment to make responsible decis ions with respect to the person’ s hospitalization or treatment, and who because of that illness meets any of the following criteria: a. Is likely to physically injure the person’ s self or others if allowed to remain at liberty without treatment. b. Is likely to inflict serious emotional injury on members of the person ’ s family or others who lack reasonable opportunity to avoid contact with the person with mental illness if the person with mental illness is allowed to remain at liberty without treatment. c. Is unable to satisfy the person’ s needs for nourishment, clothing, essential medical care, or

1 C.I.T. has been serving two consecutive life sentences for murder in the first degree since 2002. In September of 2012 , he was transferred to the mental health unit due to behavioral problems.3

shelter so that it is likely that the person will suffer physical injury, physical debilitation, or death. Iowa Code § 229.1 (17)(a)

– (c) ( 2013 )

. The definition of serious mental impairment has three elements. J.P. , 574 N.W.2d at 343

. C.I.T. must be found (1) to have a mental illness, consequently (2) to lack “sufficient judgment to make responsible decis ions with respect to the person’ s hospitalization or treatment” and (3) to be likely, if allowed to remain at liberty, to inf lic t physical injury on the person’ s self or others, to inflict serious emotional injury on a designated class of
persons, or be unable to satisfy the person’ s physical needs. Id. Our supreme court has also noted the endangerment element “requires a pred ictive judgment, based on prior manifestations but nevertheless ultimately grounded on future rather than past danger.” In re Mohr , 383 N.W.2d 539, 542. (Iowa 1986). The danger the person poses to himself or others must be evidenced by a “recent
overt a ct, attempt or threat.” Id. On appeal, C.I.T. claims there is not cl ear and convincing evidence he is “seriously mentally impaired” because (1) he does not lack the judgment to make responsible treatment decisions, and (2) he is not a danger to himself o r others. We disagree. C.I.T. testified he does not believe he has a mental illness and
does not need the medications prescribed for him. He has requested the drug Dexedrine, which he previously received in his youth. His treating physician
testified D exedrine would only worsen his current condition. The record shows when C.I.T. is not medicated he has increased levels of dysfunction and behavioral issues. Additionally, C.I.T. by his own actions has prove d he is still a danger to others. A month before his appeal hearing, C.I.T. stood up and4

pushed a table at a staff member during a review of his placement, treatment, and programming. He admitted this behavior was not appropriate, but stated sitting down “hasn’t worked.” We conclude the State has established by clear and convincing evidence C.I.T. is seriously mentally impaired and in need of involuntary commi t t al

. Accordingly, we affirm the district court order.
AFFIRMED

.