State v. N. M.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. N. M.

222 P.3d 48, 232 Or. App. 561, 2009 Ore. App. LEXIS 2030

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedDecember 16, 2009

DocketMC090008; A141644

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 222 P.3d 48 (State v. N. M.) 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. N. M., 222 P.3d 48, 232 Or. App. 561, 2009 Ore. App. LEXIS 2030 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

In this mental commitment case, appellant contends that, among other things, the evidence was insufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, at the time of the hearing, he suffered from a mental disorder that caused him to be a danger to himself or to others. ORS 426.130(1). The state concedes that the evidence is not sufficient. On de novo review, State v. O’Neill, 274 Or 59, 61, 545 P2d 97 (1976), we agree that the evidence is insufficient.

Reversed.

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

PER CURIAM

In this mental commitment case, appellant contends that, among other things, the evidence was insufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, at the time of the hearing, he suffered from a mental disorder that caused him to be a danger to himself or to others. ORS 426.130(1). The state concedes that the evidence is not sufficient. On de novo review, State v. O’Neill, 274 Or 59, 61, 545 P2d 97 (1976), we agree that the evidence is insufficient.

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

222 P.3d 48, 232 Or. App. 561, 2009 Ore. App. LEXIS 2030, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-n-m-orctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack