State v. LeHuquet
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Per curiam
Defendant appeals his commitment to the custody of the Psychiatric Security Review Board (PSRB) following the trial court’s finding that he was not responsible because of mental disease or defect. He contends that the court erred in placing him under the jurisdiction of PSRB, because there was insufficient evidence of his dangerousness to himself or others. We agree.
Former ORS 161.327(1), in effect at the time of the hearing, required that the court find by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant represents a substantial danger to himself or others in order to place him under PSRB.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Matter of ChristoffersonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
- Matter of SterzicgCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
- State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1972
- State v. RathCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. JacobsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984