Court Opinion

ID: 9803452
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 15:38:30.257076+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:03:10.306956
License: Public Domain

BARNES, Judge,
concurring.
I concur with the majority's analysis. However, I write separately to emphasize and highlight what I believe are inadequa-cles that our State's mental health system displays here. On the one hand, representatives from Logansport testified that that hospital was capable of providing the "restorative services" that Leedy requires, albeit it would likely require the use of third-party providers outside of the hospital itself. That is because Logansport is better-suited for treatment of mental illness, not traumatic brain injuries. On the other hand, the chief counsel for DMHA testified regarding the "constraints" her *314agency faces regarding outpatient restorative services. In other words, no or very limited money is available for these services.
All agree that the Larue Center in Indianapolis is better-suited to handle the specific type of brain injuries Leedy sustained. I would respectfully, but strongly, suggest that DMHA focus on securing the best and most appropriate treatment for Leedy-wherever that might be. Without providing the best possible services for competency treatment, evaluation, and restoration (if possible), DMHA and the State would possibly be delaying ultimate resolution of this case at the expense of Leedy, his family, the victims, and families of the victims of Leedy's alleged crimes.