State v. R. S.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. R. S.

315 P.3d 446, 259 Or. App. 653

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedNovember 27, 2013

Docket130463688; A154234

StatusPublished

This text of 315 P.3d 446 (State v. R. S.) 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. R. S., 315 P.3d 446, 259 Or. App. 653 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing her as a mentally ill person for a period not to exceed 180 days. ORS 426.130. Appellant argues that, contrary to the trial court’s ruling, the record does not establish by clear and convincing evidence that she is unable to provide for her basic needs because of a mental disorder. See ORS 426.005(l)(e). The state concedes that the evidence is legally insufficient for involuntary commitment and that the judgment should be reversed. We agree, accept the state’s concession, and reverse.

Reversed.

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

PER CURIAM

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing her as a mentally ill person for a period not to exceed 180 days. ORS 426.130. Appellant argues that, contrary to the trial court’s ruling, the record does not establish by clear and convincing evidence that she is unable to provide for her basic needs because of a mental disorder. See ORS 426.005(l)(e). The state concedes that the evidence is legally insufficient for involuntary commitment and that the judgment should be reversed. We agree, accept the state’s concession, and reverse.

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

315 P.3d 446, 259 Or. App. 653, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-r-s-orctapp-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack