Legal Opinion

State v. F. C.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 24, 2010No. 300902088; A141405PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, J.

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing her to the custody of the Mental Health Division, ORS 426.130(l)(b)(C), based on a finding that, because of a mental disorder, she was dangerous to herself, ORS 426.005(l)(e)(A).1 Appellant contends on appeal that the state failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that she presented a danger to herself. We agree and, accordingly, reverse.

We review the facts de novo. State v. O’Neill, 274 Or 59, 61, 545 P2d 97 (1976).2 Appellant suffers from psychosis and paranoia. In the two months before her commitment hearing, she underwent three…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. O'Neill v. O'NeillOregon Supreme Court · 1976
  2. State v. AyalaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
  3. State v. JayneCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  4. State v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
  5. State v. HambletonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. D. M.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  2. State v. L. D.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  3. State v. D. S.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  4. State v. DMCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  5. State v. DSCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API