Opinion ID: 1281049
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: treatment plan

Text: Finally, appellant contends that the district court violated his right to treatment under § 29-3703 and the Fourth [sic] and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, as well as article 1, § 3, of the Nebraska Constitution, by not ordering the LRC to administer a specific treatment program. After finding appellant to be both mentally ill and dangerous, the district court ordered appellant confined to the Forensic Mental Health Service unit of the LRC for appropriate psychiatric treatment by the staff of the Regional Center. Appellant contends that because the district court accepted the opinion of Dr. Anderson and substantially discounted the opinions of appellant's witnesses, it should have ordered the LRC to administer Dr. Anderson's specific treatment recommendations. Dr. Anderson testified appellant should receive individual psychodynamic-oriented therapy. Upon appellant's appeal of his 1993 annual review hearing, this court held that the purpose of the acquitted persons statutes is to protect the public from mentally ill dangerous persons who have demonstrated their dangerous proclivities by committing criminal acts for which they are not punished because of insanity. State v. Simants, 245 Neb. 925, 517 N.W.2d 361 (1994) (quoting Tulloch v. State, 237 Neb. 138, 465 N.W.2d 448 (1991)). This court has not held, and the legislative history and plain meaning of the statute do not indicate, that the purpose of § 29-3703 is for the courts to direct psychiatrists and psychologists on how to best treat the mental illness of a person committed. The district court's order followed the directives of § 29-3703 by balancing the treatment needs of appellant with public safety concerns. Therefore, the district court did not err by not ordering the LRC to administer a specific treatment plan.