Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

310 Or. App. 863

State v. C. T.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 21, 2021

Court of Appeals of Oregon · decided 2021-04-21

Applies OR 426 § 426.090 · OR 426 § 426.130

Reversed · Decided 2021-04-21

                                863

              Submitted March 5, reversed April 21, 2021


                  In the Matter of C. T.,
         a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness.
                  STATE OF OREGON,
                       Respondent,
                            v.
                          C. T.,
                        Appellant.
             Klamath County Circuit Court
                  20CC05255; A174667
                             
485 P3d 312


  Cameron F. Wogan, Judge.
   Joseph R. DeBin and Multnomah Defenders, Inc., filed
the brief for appellant.
   Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
Solicitor General, and Shannon T. Reel, Assistant Attorney
General, filed the brief for respondent.
  Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Tookey, Judge,
and Aoyagi, Judge.
  PER CURIAM
  Reversed.
864                                              State v. C. T.

        PER CURIAM
          Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing
her to the Mental Health Division for a period not to exceed
180 days and an order prohibiting her from purchasing or
possessing firearms. ORS 426.130. She contends that both
must be reversed because the court failed to issue a citation
to her as required by ORS 426.090, which provides, among
other things, that a citation must contain “the specific reasons the person is believed to be a person with mental illness.” As the state concedes, we have found reversible plain
error in situations where no citation was issued. See State v.
R. E. F., 
299 Or App 199
, 
447 P3d 56
 (2019) (exercising discretion to correct plain error given the gravity of the violation).
We further note that this case is distinguishable from State
v. K. R. B., 
309 Or App 455
, 
482 P3d 134
 (2021), in which we
declined to exercise discretion to correct an error, where a
citation was served belatedly at the commitment hearing
but the record nonetheless established that the appellant in
that case had been advised of his rights as required by ORS
426.090. Here, appellant was not so advised, and no citation was ever issued. For the reasons set forth in R. E. F., we
exercise our discretion to review and correct the error.
        Reversed.

/310/orapp/863 · .json · Public domain