Supreme Court
No. 2024-359-Appeal.
(MH-24-489)
In re G.S. :
ORDER
The respondent, G.S., appeals from an amended order issued by the District
Court certifying him to outpatient treatment, finding him not competent to make
informed decisions with respect to recommended medications, and consenting to the
administration of certain medications. On appeal, G.S. contends that the order was
made in plain error and that he was unable to prepare for trial.
This case came before the Supreme Court pursuant to an order directing the
parties to show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not be summarily
decided. After a careful review of the record and oral argument, we are of the
opinion that cause has not been shown and that the appeal may be resolved without
further briefing or argument. For the reasons set forth herein, the matter before the
Court is moot.
In September 2024, G.S. was engaging in increasingly erratic behavior in the
community. In response to G.S.’s escalating behavior, Scituate police requested an
evaluation of G.S. at Gateway Healthcare Inc. (Gateway) that resulted in G.S.’s
-1-admission to Rhode Island Hospital under emergency certification. Shortly
thereafter, Jared Au Yeung, M.D., a staff psychiatrist at Rhode Island Hospital, filed
a Petition for Civil Court Certification pursuant to G.L. 1956 § 40.1-5-8(a), and a
Petition for Instructions pursuant to § 40.1-5-8(m), seeking permission to treat G.S.
A hearing was held in the District Court on September 27, 2024. G.S. was
represented at the hearing by competent counsel from the Office of the Mental
Health Advocate. At the hearing, Dr. Au Yeung testified that G.S. had a history of
schizophrenia, multiple inpatient psychiatric admissions, and court-ordered
treatment. According to Dr. Au Yeung, while at Rhode Island Hospital, G.S. refused
treatments and was argumentative, paranoid, and disruptive. After evaluating G.S.,
Dr. Au Yeung concluded that his “continued unsupervised presence in the
community would create a likelihood of serious harm by reason of psychiatric illness
as manifested by a substantial risk of physical harm to others.” Doctor Au Yeung
investigated alternatives to inpatient treatment, but found that none were suitable for
G.S.’s treatment needs. Counsel for G.S. engaged in extensive cross-examination
of Dr. Au Yeung.
At the conclusion of the hearing, an order was entered granting the Petition
for Civil Court Certification. The order certified G.S. to inpatient treatment, found
him not competent to make informed decisions with respect to recommended
medications, and consented to the administration of certain medications to him. The
-2-order was later amended to allow for outpatient treatment at Gateway. The amended
order was set to expire on March 27, 2025. On March 27, 2025, the order expired
by its own terms. No new certifications or petitions were filed, and the case expired
without further hearing.
It is well settled that “a case is moot if the original complaint raised a
justiciable controversy, but events occurring after the filing have deprived the
litigant of a continuing stake in the controversy.” Rhode Island Department of
Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals v. L.Z., 208 A.3d
242, 242-43 (R.I. 2019) (mem.) (quoting Hallsmith-Sysco Food Services, LLC v.
Marques, 970 A.2d 1211, 1213 (R.I. 2009)). As of March 27, 2025, G.S. is no longer
committed or subject to the conditions of the order. Therefore, there is no relief this
Court can provide G.S. at this time. See Robar v. Robar, 154 A.3d 947, 948 (R.I.
2017) (mem.) (stating that the order at issue had expired, rendering the case moot).
Because this appeal is now moot, we need not address the issues raised by either
party in their submissions to this Court.
We note that G.S. appeared before this Court and presented his case in a
passionate and respectful manner. While we are sympathetic to his plight, the order
appealed from has expired by its own terms. Therefore, we are unable to grant him
any relief at this time, as there is no justiciable issue before us. The case is moot.
-3-The brief duration of civil certification orders often prevents them from being
heard on appeal. See In re L.Z., 293 A.3d 1273, 1274 (R.I. 2019) (mem.); L.Z., 208
A.3d at 243. As members of this Court have previously stated, “because orders such
as the one at issue in this case are in effect for a mere six months, it is inherently
difficult, if not impossible, for an appeal from such an order to be heard and decided
by this Court before the order expires and becomes moot.” L.Z., 208 A.3d at 243
(Indeglia, J., concurring). To facilitate meaningful review, we, again, direct Rhode
Island Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and
Hospitals, to ensure that a stenographer is provided for civil certification hearings. 1
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.
Entered as an Order of this Court this ___ day of October, 2025.
By Order,
Clerk
1
We note that the transcript of the District Court hearing was not prepared until September 17, 2025, and was received by this Court on September 18, 2025, less than a week before argument.
-4-STATE OF RHODE ISLAND
SUPREME COURT – CLERK’S OFFICE
Licht Judicial Complex
250 Benefit Street
Providence, RI 02903
ORDER COVER SHEET
Title of Case In re G.S.
No. 2024-359-Appeal.
Case Number
(MH-24-489)
Date Order Filed October 24, 2025
Suttell, C.J., Goldberg, Robinson, Lynch Prata, and
Justices
Long, JJ.
Source of Appeal Sixth Division District Court
Judicial Officer from Lower Court Associate Justice Mary McCaffrey
For Petitioner:
Thomas J. Corrigan, Jr.
RI Department of Behavioral Healthcare,
Attorney(s) on Appeal
Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals
For Respondent:
Grant Shippee, pro se
SU-CMS-02B (revised November 2022)