Alphonso Haynesworth v. South Carolina Department of Mental Health, et al.
Whether the lower court erred in its interpretation and application of the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions
No question identified. : | ic EO 6 | QSEE RX 9 ve go ERLE LEGS i | : Ww gene BYTE PEEL ES @ : = oo SULETY PERE LORE ES co Reg SER Hck Brot FE. | OE, am —~z \ OR Ua, 7) ® ve Ze i aaa qn a Oe o& e & a x m8 ; ce 2 RO ¥ Fe Onde qq & ar an a | ao ee x gy = aa G° Ske Gag EE LES RE bee poke cP ke oP hs | ee #8 gy oh BEE wetsteatiat ! aed OD % a OZ A a & “GOS PY DS 2Ar CaN aeA &% aE eS ae hep ng p20 ERE 48 Be aa kee eet oe Bie Gee eg Gerba eke ee el an \ ion oe Fer RS tb et4 Liebe ete 7% | 449 p” Wey ge Tec teater kg \ ¢ ‘Sa 2 BAD € b8,% © Lit a3 eer 3 Lowes oS SoD Ls Fro § mtisksae : m GA z¢6 2 2 oO pe te S fF RGR RE EUO eB % x x2 Cages 5 Ec x FP & g 6 RO Rd ZR . } 2% AR 4 aa k | B | aD I i a. wf a ns A