State v. A. W. R.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. A. W. R.

502 P.3d 787, 317 Or. App. 277

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedJanuary 26, 2022

DocketA175569

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 502 P.3d 787 (State v. A. W. R.) 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

State v. A. W. R., 502 P.3d 787, 317 Or. App. 277 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

Submitted December 28, 2021, reversed January 26, 2022

In the Matter of A. W. R., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. A. W. R., Appellant. Marion County Circuit Court 21CC00835; A175569 502 P3d 787

Daniel J. Wren, Judge. Margaret Huntington filed the brief for appellant. Also on the brief was O’Connor Weber LLC. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Patricia G. Rincon, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before James, Presiding Judge, and Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Kamins, Judge. PER CURIAM Reversed. 278 State v. A. W. R.

PER CURIAM Defendant appeals a judgment committing him to the custody of the Mental Health Division for a period not to exceed 180 days based on a determination that he was a danger to others, and a related order prohibiting him from purchasing or possessing firearms. ORS 426.005(1)(f)(A). Appellant contends, among other things, that the record does not contain clear and convincing evidence to support the court’s conclusion that he is a danger to others. The state concedes that the record is legally insufficient in that regard and that the judgment of commitment should be reversed. We agree, accept the state’s concession, and reverse the judgment of commitment and the firearms order. See State v. R. C. S., 291 Or App 489, 490, 415 P3d 1164 (2018) (revers- ing both the order of commitment and the order prohibiting the appellant from purchasing or possessing firearms). Reversed.

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

Submitted December 28, 2021, reversed January 26, 2022

In the Matter of A. W. R., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. A. W. R., Appellant. Marion County Circuit Court 21CC00835; A175569 502 P3d 787

Daniel J. Wren, Judge. Margaret Huntington filed the brief for appellant. Also on the brief was O’Connor Weber LLC. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Patricia G. Rincon, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before James, Presiding Judge, and Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Kamins, Judge. PER CURIAM Reversed. 278 State v. A. W. R.

PER CURIAM Defendant appeals a judgment committing him to the custody of the Mental Health Division for a period not to exceed 180 days based on a determination that he was a danger to others, and a related order prohibiting him from purchasing or possessing firearms. ORS 426.005(1)(f)(A). Appellant contends, among other things, that the record does not contain clear and convincing evidence to support the court’s conclusion that he is a danger to others. The state concedes that the record is legally insufficient in that regard and that the judgment of commitment should be reversed. We agree, accept the state’s concession, and reverse the judgment of commitment and the firearms order. See State v. R. C. S., 291 Or App 489, 490, 415 P3d 1164 (2018) (revers- ing both the order of commitment and the order prohibiting the appellant from purchasing or possessing firearms). Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

502 P.3d 787, 317 Or. App. 277, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-a-w-r-orctapp-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack