State v. C. J. W.

328 Or. App. 528

• Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon
• Decided: October 4, 2023
• Docket: A179346
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1). Submitted March 10, affirmed October 4, 2023

In the Matter of C. J. W., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. C. J. W., Appellant. Clackamas County Circuit Court 22CC04787; A179346

Katherine E. Weber, Judge. Joseph R. DeBin and Multnomah Defenders, Inc., filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Jona J. Maukonen, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Egan, Judge. LAGESEN, C. J. Affirmed. Nonprecedential Memo Op: 328 Or App 528 (2023) 529

LAGESEN, C. J. In accordance with State v. Balfour, 311 Or 434, 814 P2d 1069 (1991), and ORAP 5.90, appellant appeals a judgment civilly committing him on the ground that he is dangerous to others and an order prohibiting him from purchasing and possessing a firearm.1 Following the sub- mission of the opening brief, we requested supplemental briefing under ORAP 5.90(3) on the question whether the citation was served in compliance with ORS 426.090 and, if not, whether the court committed reversible error in pro- ceeding with the commitment hearing, notwithstanding the fact that any error was unpreserved. Having considered the supplemental briefing submitted by the parties, we con- clude on this record, as was the case in State v. P. B. S., 324 Or App 706, 710-11, 527 P3d 815 (2023), that it is not obvious that the citation was not served on appellant as required by ORS 426.090 and that, consequently, the trial court did not plainly error by proceeding with the hearing. Therefore, as in P. B. S., we affirm. Affirmed.

1 As authorized by ORS 2.570(2)(b), this matter is determined by a two-judge panel. See, e.g., State v. Yother, 310 Or App 563, 484 P3d 1098 (2021) (deciding matter submitted through Balfour process by two-judge panel); Ballinger v. Nooth, 254 Or App 402, 295 P3d 115 (2012), rev den, 353 Or 747 (2013) (same).