Brown v. Cupp

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Brown v. Cupp

567 P.2d 619, 30 Or. App. 647, 1977 Ore. App. LEXIS 1644

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedAugust 17, 1977

DocketNo. 97296, CA 7653

StatusPublished

This text of 567 P.2d 619 (Brown v. Cupp) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brown v. Cupp, 567 P.2d 619, 30 Or. App. 647, 1977 Ore. App. LEXIS 1644 (Or. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this habeas corpus proceeding, plaintiff, a prisoner in the Oregon State Penitentiary, appeals from the trial court’s finding that he was not mentally ill and therefore was not being denied adequate medical care for his mental illness.

Contrary to plaintiffs contention, the testimony of the prison psychiatrist that the defendant was not mentally ill and did not need psychiatric care is sufficient to support a finding of fact not subject to being disturbed on review. Ball v. Gladden, 250 Or 485, 443 P2d 621 (1968).¹

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

In this habeas corpus proceeding, plaintiff, a prisoner in the Oregon State Penitentiary, appeals from the trial court’s finding that he was not mentally ill and therefore was not being denied adequate medical care for his mental illness.

Contrary to plaintiffs contention, the testimony of the prison psychiatrist that the defendant was not mentally ill and did not need psychiatric care is sufficient to support a finding of fact not subject to being disturbed on review. Ball v. Gladden, 250 Or 485, 443 P2d 621 (1968).¹

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

567 P.2d 619, 30 Or. App. 647, 1977 Ore. App. LEXIS 1644, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-cupp-orctapp-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack