607
Submitted August 6, reversed September 15, 2021
In the Matter of C. M. B.,
a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness.
STATE OF OREGON,
Respondent,
v.
C. M. B.,
Appellant.
Jackson County Circuit Court
21CC02735; A176099
Laura A. Cromwell, Judge.
Joseph R. DeBin and Multnomah Defenders, Inc., filed
the brief for appellant.
Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
Solicitor General, and Denise G. Fjordbeck, Assistant
Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and
Mooney, Judge.
PER CURIAM
Reversed.
608 State v. C. M. B.
PER CURIAM
Appellant appeals from 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. She asserts that the trial court erred in
accepting her stipulation to the commitment without holding a hearing and advising her of her rights under ORS
426.100(1). The state concedes that the court erred in failing
to advise appellant of her rights. We agree and accept the
concession.
Appellant was detained on a physician’s hold as a
person alleged to have a mental illness and was scheduled
for a hearing five judicial days thereafter. On the fourth
judicial day, the court appointed counsel for appellant, and
later that day, appellant, her counsel, and a deputy district
attorney signed a document entitled “stipulation and agreement for commitment,” in which appellant acknowledged
her mental disorder and that she was a danger to others.
Thereafter, without holding a hearing, the court entered the
judgment committing appellant and the order prohibiting
her from purchasing or possessing firearms.
Pursuant to ORS 426.095(2)(b), the court is required
to hold a commitment hearing within five judicial days of
the detention of a person alleged to have a mental illness.
Although limited exceptions exist for the postponement of
such hearing, see, e.g., ORS 426.095(2)(c), the statutes do not
provide for dispensing with the hearing altogether without
the court having informed the person of his or her rights
under ORS 426.100(1). See State v. Allison,
(1994) (court erred in accepting stipulation
to mental commitment without first advising the appellant of his rights pursuant to ORS 426.100(1)); cf. State v.
Burge,
(2000) (counsel may
not waive advice of rights of the person alleged with mental illness because court must conduct an examination on
the record to determine whether the waiver is knowing and
voluntary).
Reversed.
