State v. Dixon
This text of 779 P.2d 1106 (State v. Dixon) 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.
Opinion
In this commitment proceeding, the state concedes that the record does not show that the examiner appointed by the trial court was qualified under the standards in ORS 426.110(2). We accept that concession.
The state also concedes that, even though defendant does suffer from a mental disorder, the record does not show so clearly that she is “mentally ill” as defined in ORS 426.005 that we could affirm the trial court in the absence of a report by a qualified person. As the state puts it, “[T]he evidence that defendant constituted a danger to herself, or was unable to care for her basic personal needs, was slim to none.” We accept that concession, too.
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
779 P.2d 1106, 98 Or. App. 756, 1989 Ore. App. LEXIS 1476, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-dixon-orctapp-1989.