M.M.

Conservatorship of the Pers. v. M.M.

Good Law
251 Cal. Rptr. 3d 855·39 Cal. App. 5th 496
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 29, 2019B293676California1,598 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Grimes, J.

*856 *498 M.M. appeals the appointment of a conservator under the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (LPS) ( Welf. & Inst. Code, § 5000 et seq. ) after a jury found him to be gravely disabled due to a mental disorder. He does not challenge the jury's verdict or claim any error in the trial proceedings that led to his conservatorship. His only claim on appeal is the trial court denied his right to begin a jury trial within 25 days of his jury trial demand. Instead, his trial began 61 days after his demand. He asks us to order his conservatorship expires 36 days earlier than the date the trial court ordered (61 - 25 = 36), a remedy for which he provides no authority in the law. M.M. has forfeited the contention because for the most part the delay in beginning trial was due to his own counsel's requests for a confidential expert report and to continue the trial to accommodate counsel's schedule. We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On July 26, 2018, the Los Angeles County Office of the Public Guardian filed a petition for the appointment of a conservator of the person and estate for M.M. Two doctors declared in support of the petition that M.M. had a diagnosis of schizophrenia and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.