Cramer v. Psychiatric Security Review Board

857 P.2d 232, 122 Or. App. 290, 1993 Ore. App. LEXIS 1288

• Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon
• Decided: August 4, 1993
• Docket: 89-1023; CA A71150
• Status: Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Petitioner seeks review of an order of the Psychiatric Security Review Board (PSRB), which denied his request for discharge, found him unfit for conditional release, and committed him to a state hospital. ORS 161.385(8).

He argues that the Board erred, because there was not substantial evidence to support a finding that he is affected by a mental disease or defect, or that he could not be adequately controlled, with treatment, on conditional release. Substantial evidence supports the Board’s finding that petitioner suffers from alcohol and polysubstance abuse and that he could not be adequately controlled, with treatment, on conditional release.

Petitioner also contends that PSRB should not have continued its jurisdiction over him, because polysubstance abuse and alcohol abuse are not “mental diseases” or “mental defects.” He argues that they are personality disorders. 1 Petitioner did not raise the issue of PSRB’s classification of polysubstance and alcohol abuse before the Board, and we will not entertain it for the first time on appeal. Marbet v. Portland Gen. Elect., 277 Or 447, 456, 561 P2d 154 (1977); see also Northwest Advancement v. Wage and Hour Comm., 96 Or App 146, 148, 772 P2d 934, rev den 308 Or 315 (1989), cert den 496 US 907 (1990).

Affirmed.

1 A person cannot be recommitted solely on the basis of a personality disorder. OAR 859-10-005(4)(b).