405 ILCS 5/3 — 610 (West 1994). The Code’s procedural safeguards are not mere technicalities; they are essential tools to protect the liberty interests of persons adjudged to be mentally ill. In re Luttrell, 261 Ill. App. 3d 221, 230, 633 N.E.2d 74, 81 (1994). These safeguards must be strictly construed in favor of the respondent. In re La Touche, 247 Ill. App. 3d 615, 618, 617 N.E.2d 844, 846 (1993). It is well-settled law that the 24-hour examination rule is a bright-line rule and failure to conduct an examination within 24 hours results in the release of the respondent. See In re Rovelstad, 281 Ill. App. 3d 956, 965, 667 N.E.2d 720, 725 (1996); In re Valentine, 201 Ill. App. 3d 10, 13-14, 558 N.E.2d 807, 809-10 (1990); see also La Touche, 247 Ill. App. 3d at 620, 617 N.E.2d at 847 (<HOLDING>). The burden is upon the State to affirmatively
holding filing of motion for reconsideration does not toll the 30day deadline for filing petition for review holding that the 24hour deadline for filing a petition for commitment is a brightline rule holding that time limit for filing petition for review is mandatory and jurisdictional holding that the 180day filing deadline is jurisdictional and mandatory holding that in this context the filing deadline is tantamount to a statute of limitations