State v. R. S.

241 P.3d 308, 237 Or. App. 569, 2010 Ore. App. LEXIS 1181
Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided September 29, 2010·No. 09MH098; A142091·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM

In this mental commitment case, appellant contends that the trial court erred in entering an order of civil commitment because, among other things, the court failed to provide him with a legally sufficient advice of rights. According to appellant, the advice of rights was insufficient in that the court did not tell him that he could subpoena witnesses. The state concedes the error. We agree and accept the concession. See State v. Grellert, 144 Or App 201, 203, 925 P2d 161 (1996) (trial court must advise alleged mentally ill person that he or she can subpoena witnesses).

Reversed.

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

State v. R. S., 241 P.3d 308, 237 Or. App. 569, 2010 Ore. App. LEXIS 1181 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).

241 P.3d 308 (State v. R. S.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In the Matter of Rs
241 P.3d 308 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2010)