Matter of S.M.

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court affirmed an involuntary civil commitment order for S.M. S.M. argued that Montana's statutory prohibition on waiving appointed counsel in civil commitment proceedings violated his rights to self-representation under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments. The court held that the Sixth Amendment does not apply to civil commitment proceedings and that the Fourteenth Amendment does not establish a fundamental right to self-representation in such proceedings; the statutory prohibition therefore survived rational-basis review.

Holdings

1. The Sixth Amendment does not apply to civil-commitment proceedings because it is limited by its text to criminal prosecutions. Accordingly, it does not provide a constitutional right to self-representation in an involuntary civil-commitment proceeding.
2. The Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause does not establish a fundamental right to represent oneself in an involuntary civil-commitment proceeding.
3. Section 53-21-119(1), MCA, is rationally related to legitimate governmental interests in preserving the fairness, integrity, accuracy, and orderly administration of civil-commitment proceedings and therefore survives substantive-due-process review.
4. Although a respondent may not waive counsel, the respondent retains a right to participate personally in the proceeding and may participate extensively when appropriate to the respondent's circumstances and capacity, provided that participation does not prevent the fair, orderly, and accurate administration of the proceeding.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Montana Code § 53-21-119(1), which provides that the right to counsel may not be waived in an involuntary civil-commitment proceeding, violates the Sixth Amendment right of self-representation.
2. Whether the prohibition on waiving counsel violates the substantive Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
3. Whether a respondent in a Montana civil-commitment proceeding may participate personally and extensively in the proceeding despite being unable to waive appointed counsel.

Disposition

affirmed