State v. Zabransky
998 P.2d 805, 166 Or. App. 672, 2000 Ore. App. LEXIS 636
Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided April 19, 2000·No. MC 97-21; CA A99281·Published·Cited by 7 cases
Opinions
Appellant seeks review of the trial court’s order finding him to be mentally ill and committing him to the Mental Health Division for a period of 180 days. Appellant’s only argument that warrants discussion is that the trial court’s advice under ORS 426.100(1) was inadequate. That argument is identical in substance to the one that we considered and rejected in State v. Buffum, 166 Or App 552, 999 P2d 541 (2000)
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Zabransky, 998 P.2d 805, 166 Or. App. 672, 2000 Ore. App. LEXIS 636 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
998 P.2d 805 (State v. Zabransky) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Cach
19 P.3d 992 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2001)
State v. Burge
1 P.3d 490 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2000)
State v. Buffum
999 P.2d 541 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2000)
State v. Zabransky
998 P.2d 805 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2000)