State v. B. C.

No. 84              February 7, 2024                  627

   This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion
    pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited
         except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).

         IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE
                 STATE OF OREGON

                  In the Matter of B. C.,
         a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness.
                  STATE OF OREGON,
                       Respondent,
                            v.
                          B. C.,
                        Appellant.
               Lane County Circuit Court
                   23CC03776; A181759

  Charles M. Zennaché, Judge.
  Submitted January 5, 2024.
    Christopher J. O’Connor and Multnomah Defenders, Inc.,
filed the brief for appellant.
   Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
Solicitor General, and Peenesh Shah, Assistant Attorney
General, filed the brief for respondent.
  Before Tookey, Presiding Judge, Egan, Judge, and
Kamins, Judge.
  PER CURIAM
  Reversed.
628                                             State v. B. C.

        PER CURIAM
          Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing
him to the custody of the Oregon Health Authority for a
period not to exceed 180 days. The trial court entered that
judgment after finding that appellant is unable to provide for
his basic personal needs and is not receiving care necessary
to avoid serious physical harm in the near future. See ORS
426.005(1)(f)(B). On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of
the state’s evidence to support the court’s basic-needs determination. The state concedes that the record is legally insufficient in that regard under our caselaw. See State v. M. A.
E., 

, 240-41, 

 (2019) (explaining
that ORS 426.005(1)(f)(B) requires a “nonspeculative risk of
‘serious physical harm’—meaning that the person’s safe survival will be compromised—in the near future, even though
that risk is not imminent”). We agree with and accept the
state’s concession.
        Reversed.