State v. H. D. (In re H. D.)
This text of 415 P.3d 1153 (State v. H. D. (In re H. D.)) 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
*488Appellant appeals an order committing her to the Oregon Health Authority for a period not to exceed 180 days pursuant to ORS 426.130(1)(a)(C), and an order prohibiting the purchase or possession of firearms under ORS 426.130 (1)(a)(D). In her third assignment of error, appellant argues that the trial court committed plain error when it failed to fully advise her of her rights in accordance with the requirements of ORS 426.100(1). Specifically, appellant contends that the trial court plainly erred when it failed to advise her that the possible results of the proceeding included voluntary treatment or conditional release. See ORS 426.130(1), (2) (setting out possible results of proceeding). The state has conceded that, under State v. M. M. ,
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
415 P.3d 1153, 291 Or. App. 487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-h-d-in-re-h-d-orctapp-2018.