AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Child-Appellant was subject to a district court order extending his short-term commitment due to behavioral issues and substance abuse. Initially, during his commitment, the Child was defiant and involved in numerous incidents, showing a significant decline in behavior with up to twenty reports during the first half of his commitment period. His behavior and attitude towards treatment did not improve until the latter half of the commitment, influenced by the death of his grandmother. The court found that extending the commitment was necessary to compensate for the lost period of treatment and to safeguard the Child's welfare.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of San Juan County, Sandra A. Price, District Judge, June 27, 2016: The district court issued an order extending the Child's short-term commitment.

Parties' Submissions

• Child-Appellant: Argued against the extension of his short-term commitment, challenging the district court's order.
• Plaintiff-Appellee (State of New Mexico): Supported the extension of the Child's short-term commitment, arguing it was necessary to safeguard the welfare of the Child and public safety.

Legal Issues

• Whether the evidence was sufficient to extend the Child's short-term commitment to safeguard his welfare and public safety.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's order extending the Child's short-term commitment.

Reasons

• Per Michael D. Bustamante, J., with Timothy L. Garcia, J., and M. Monica Zamora, J., concurring: The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision to extend the Child's short-term commitment, finding the extension necessary to safeguard the Child's welfare and public safety. The decision was based on the Child's defiant behavior, involvement in numerous incidents during the first half of his commitment, and a high level of substance abuse prior to his commitment. The court noted that the Child's behavior and attitude towards treatment did not improve until the latter half of the commitment period, influenced by the death of his grandmother. The court concluded that the evidence presented at the hearing was sufficient to justify the extension of the Child's commitment, referencing similar case law that affirmed extended commitments under comparable circumstances (paras 1-4).