¶1In this mental commitment case, appellant contends that the trial court erred in finding that, because of a mental disorder, he is either dangerous to himself or presently unable to provide for his own basic needs. ORS 426.005(l)(d). He contends that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the court’s order of commitment. The state concedes the point. On de novo review, we agree and accept the concession.
¶2Reversed.