Legal Opinion

State v. T.Y.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 26, 2017No. 16CC02695; A162258PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSercombe, P. J.

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment involuntarily committing him to the custody of the Mental Health Division based on a finding that, because of a mental disorder, appellant was a danger to himself. See ORS 426.005(1)(f); ORS 426.130. Appellant contends that the state failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that he was a danger to himself.1 As explained below, we agree and, accordingly, reverse.

When we review a challenge to a civil commitment judgment, unless we exercise our discretion to review the matter de novo, “we view the evidence, as supplemented and buttressed by…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. B. B.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  2. State v. S. R. J.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  3. State v. M. A.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  4. State v. OlsenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
  5. State v. PowellCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. M. J. F.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  2. State v. T. W. W. (In re T. W. W.)Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2018
  3. State v. C. L.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  4. State v. K. G.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2024
  5. State v. S. S.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2021

3 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