State v. N. M.
222 P.3d 48, 232 Or. App. 561, 2009 Ore. App. LEXIS 2030
Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided December 16, 2009·No. MC090008; A141644·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
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
State v. N. M., 222 P.3d 48, 232 Or. App. 561, 2009 Ore. App. LEXIS 2030 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
222 P.3d 48 (State v. N. M.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
In the Matter of Nm
222 P.3d 48 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2009)