Legal Opinion · Dissent
Hodgin v. Psychiatric Security Review Board
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided June 24, 1992No. PSRB 90-1088; CA A66470Published
1DissentRossman, J.
I do not believe that the majority opinion holds together. To begin with, it may be based on a faulty premise. It is difficult to say from petitioner’s brief whether he seeks a conditional release or a complete discharge. At the hearing, petitioner’s attorney stated his position:
“My — at this time my client is requesting that he be discharged or, in the alternative, that he be found appropriate for conditional release and allowed 90 days within which to prepare and submit a conditional release plan for your review.” (Emphasis supplied.)
However, on appeal, petitioner’s assignment of error…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Martin v. Psychiatric Security Review BoardOregon Supreme Court · 1991
- Baldwin v. Psychiatric Security Review BoardCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989
- Martin v. Psychiatric Security Review BoardCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990