Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

325 Or. App. 621

State v. N. B.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 26, 2023

This page is marked noindex.

Court of Appeals of Oregon · decided 2023-04-26

Applies OR 426 § 426.005 · OR 426 § 426.130

Reversed · Decided 2023-04-26

                                621

   This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion
    pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited
         except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).
              Submitted March 3, reversed April 26, 2023


                  In the Matter of N. B.,
         a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness.
                  STATE OF OREGON,
                       Respondent,
                            v.
                          N. B.,
                        Appellant.
            Multnomah County Circuit Court
                  22CC04049; A179245

  Benjamin S. Johnston, Judge pro tempore.
    Christopher J. O’Connor and Multnomah Defenders, Inc.
filed the brief for appellant.
   Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
Solicitor General, and Dustin Buehler, Assistant Attorney
General, filed the brief for respondent.
  Before Shorr, Presiding Judge, and Mooney, Judge, and
Pagán, Judge.
  PER CURIAM
  Reversed.
622                                             State v. N. B.

        PER CURIAM
         Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment involuntarily committing her to the custody of the Mental Health
Division for a period not to exceed 180 days, as a person
with mental illness, which includes an order prohibiting her
from purchasing or possessing firearms. See ORS 426.130.
In her sole assignment of error, appellant contends that
the record does not contain legally sufficient evidence that,
due to a mental disorder, she was a danger to herself. See
ORS 426.005(1)(f)(A); State v. S. S., 
309 Or App 131, 133
,
480 P3d 321
 (2021) (“For purposes of ORS 426.005(1)(f)(A),
a person is dangerous to self if the person’s mental disorder would cause him or her to engage in behavior that is
likely to result in physical harm to self in the near term.”
(Brackets and internal quotation marks omitted.)); State v.
A. D. S., 
258 Or App 44, 45
, 
308 P3d 365
 (2013) (“Whether
the evidence presented  is legally sufficient to support a
civil commitment is a question of law.”). The state concedes
that the evidence was insufficient to support the trial court’s
determination that appellant was a person with mental illness and that the judgment should be reversed. We agree
that the evidence here was insufficient, accept the state’s
concession, and reverse the judgment.
        Reversed.

/325/orapp/621 · .json · Public domain