may not be cited except as provided by
Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3 (1996).
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of: Zachary Bogar.
Filed May 13, 1997
Toussaint, Chief Judge
Hennepin County District Court
File No. P79134410
Michael O. Freeman, Hennepin County Attorney, William A. Neiman, Assistant County Attorney, A-2000 Government Center, Minneapolis, MN 55487 (for respondent Hennepin County)
Considered and decided by Parker, Presiding Judge, Toussaint, Chief Judge, and Huspeni, Judge.
Zachary W. Bogar appeals from his indeterminate commitment to the Minnesota State Security Hospital as a mentally ill and dangerous person pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 253B.18, subd. 3 (1996), arguing (1) his dangerous acts are too remote to be used as proof that he still represents a clear danger to others, (2) his improved condition does not support the indeterminate commitment, and (3) commitment to the Minnesota Security Hospital is not the least restrictive alternative. Because the district court's findings are not clearly erroneous, we affirm.
A determination that a patient continues to be mentally ill and dangerous requires a showing by clear and convincing evidence that the patient still
presents a clear danger to the safety of others as demonstrated by * * * a substantial likelihood that the person will engage in acts capable of inflicting serious physical harm on another.
Minn.Stat. § 253B.02, subd. 17 (1996).
Here, there is no dispute that Bogar is mentally ill. Bogar's only argument is that his dangerous actions are too remote to indicate he still represents a clear danger to others. The record shows Bogar committed four serious assaults on hospital staff during a three-week period. Bogar also threatened to rape one staff member and to kill another. Bogar also threatened to kill the President of the United States. These events occurred only eight months before the indeterminate commitment hearing. We believe the district court was not clearly erroneous in deciding Bogar's violent actions were not too remote to support indeterminate commitment.
Bogar argues his condition does not support indeterminate commitment because his condition has improved significantly since the initial commitment.
The record indicates that Bogar continues to deny he has a mental illness. All of the medical reports indicate Bogar will stop taking his medicine and rapidly decompensate. Dr.Thomas Gratzer, Bogar's treating doctor, testified that the only reason Bogar has behaved for eight months is the medicine and ongoing Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT). The district court's appointed examiner, Dr. Harry Hoberman, concluded Bogar was still dangerous and there remained "a substantial likelihood that Mr. Bogar will engage in acts capable of inflicting serious physical harm on another in the future." The district court's findings support indeterminate commitment are not clearly erroneous.
Bogar finally argues that the commitment to the Minnesota Security Hospital is not the least restrictive alternative.
The record shows that Bogar continues to believe he is not mentally ill, routinely forgets to take his drug therapy when not in a structured setting, and has escaped from two treatment hospitals. As the district court found, Bogar has a history of violence, noncompliance with drug therapy, and escape from treatment facilities. In light of these facts, the record supports the district court's decision of placement at the Minnesota Security Hospital.