State v. C. A. A.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. C. A. A.

456 P.3d 688, 302 Or. App. 116

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedJanuary 29, 2020

DocketA171994

StatusPublished

This text of 456 P.3d 688 (State v. C. A. A.) 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. C. A. A., 456 P.3d 688, 302 Or. App. 116 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

Submitted January 3, reversed January 29, 2020

In the Matter of C. A. A., aka A. C. A., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. C. A. A., aka A. C. A., Appellant. Douglas County Circuit Court 19CC04190; A171994 456 P3d 688

Ann Marie Simmons, Judge. Joseph R. DeBin and Multnomah Defenders, Inc., filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Philip Thoennes, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Chief Judge, and Powers, Judge. PER CURIAM Reversed. Cite as 302 Or App 116 (2020) 117

PER CURIAM Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment commit- ting him to the custody of the Mental Health Division for a period not to exceed 180 days and an order prohibiting him from purchasing or possessing firearms. ORS 426.130. He contends that the trial court plainly erred by not advising him of his rights as required by ORS 426.100(1). The state concedes that the trial court erred in that regard. We agree and accept the state’s concession. See State v. M. M., 288 Or App 111, 115-16, 405 P3d 192 (2017) (failure to advise the appellant of rights and consequences of hearing pursuant to ORS 426.100(1) was plain error). For the reasons stated in M. M., we conclude that it is appropriate to exercise our discretion to correct the error. Consequently, we reverse the judgment and the order. Reversed.

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

Submitted January 3, reversed January 29, 2020

In the Matter of C. A. A., aka A. C. A., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. C. A. A., aka A. C. A., Appellant. Douglas County Circuit Court 19CC04190; A171994 456 P3d 688

Ann Marie Simmons, Judge. Joseph R. DeBin and Multnomah Defenders, Inc., filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Philip Thoennes, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Chief Judge, and Powers, Judge. PER CURIAM Reversed. Cite as 302 Or App 116 (2020) 117

PER CURIAM Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment commit- ting him to the custody of the Mental Health Division for a period not to exceed 180 days and an order prohibiting him from purchasing or possessing firearms. ORS 426.130. He contends that the trial court plainly erred by not advising him of his rights as required by ORS 426.100(1). The state concedes that the trial court erred in that regard. We agree and accept the state’s concession. See State v. M. M., 288 Or App 111, 115-16, 405 P3d 192 (2017) (failure to advise the appellant of rights and consequences of hearing pursuant to ORS 426.100(1) was plain error). For the reasons stated in M. M., we conclude that it is appropriate to exercise our discretion to correct the error. Consequently, we reverse the judgment and the order. Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

456 P.3d 688, 302 Or. App. 116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-c-a-a-orctapp-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack