State v. A. B. C.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. A. B. C.

337 P.3d 983, 266 Or. App. 401

Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided October 15, 2014·No. 120970158; A152751·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing him for a period not to exceed 180 days. ORS 426.130. He contends that the state failed to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that, because of a mental disorder, he is a danger to himself. ORS 426.005(l)(e). The state concedes that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the involuntary commitment and that the judgment should be reversed. We agree, accept the state’s concession, and reverse on that basis. Accordingly, we do not address appellant’s other, unpreserved assignment of error, in which he contends that the trial court erred in failing to advise him of the possible results of the commitment proceeding as required by ORS 426.100(l)(c).

Reversed.

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

PER CURIAM

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing him for a period not to exceed 180 days. ORS 426.130. He contends that the state failed to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that, because of a mental disorder, he is a danger to himself. ORS 426.005(l)(e). The state concedes that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the involuntary commitment and that the judgment should be reversed. We agree, accept the state’s concession, and reverse on that basis. Accordingly, we do not address appellant’s other, unpreserved assignment of error, in which he contends that the trial court erred in failing to advise him of the possible results of the commitment proceeding as required by ORS 426.100(l)(c).

Reversed.

State v. A. B. C., 337 P.3d 983, 266 Or. App. 401 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

337 P.3d 983 (State v. A. B. C.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related