Statute 71 1124

71-1124. Burden of proof; court findings; dispositional hearing; when required.The petitioner has the burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the subject is a person in need of court-ordered custody and treatment. The court shall make specific findings of fact and state its conclusions of law.If after the hearing is complete the court finds that the subject is not a person in need of court-ordered custody and treatment, it shall dismiss the petition and immediately release the subject from any emergency custody order.If after the hearing is complete the court finds that the subject is a person in need of court-ordered custody and treatment, the court shall order the department to evaluate the subject and submit a plan for custody and treatment of the subject in the least restrictive alternative within thirty days and provide a copy to all parties in interest. The court shall set the matter for dispositional hearing within fifteen days after receipt of the department's plan, unless continued for good cause shown.Source Laws 2005, LB 206, § 24. Annotations The mere determination that an individual was a person in need of court ordered custody and treatment, without

plan, unless continued for good cause shown.Source Laws 2005, LB 206, § 24. Annotations The mere determination that an individual was a person in need of court ordered custody and treatment, without further action, did not affect a substantial right. In other words, an order that merely authorized development of a plan for custody and treatment and scheduled a hearing to determine what custody and treatment should be ordered upon disposition, without imposing any custody or treatment, did not have a substantial effect on a substantial right and thus was not a final, appealable order under section 25-1902. In re Interest of K.C., 313 Neb. 385, 984 N.W.2d 277 (2023). The Developmental Disabilities Court-Ordered Custody Act provides procedures and evidentiary standards which protect an individual's constitutionally protected liberty interest and, therefore, does not violate the subject's due process rights. In re Interest of C.R., 281 Neb. 75, 793 N.W.2d 330 (2011).