Full text
State v. H. M.
— 454 —
Submitted September 28, affirmed November 4, 2020
In the Matter of H. M., a Youth. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. H. M., Appellant. Clackamas County Circuit Court 130812J; Petition Number 130812J01; A169957 476 P3d 125
Colleen F. Gilmartin, Judge pro tempore. Matthew J. Steven and Youth, Rights & Justice filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Kirsten M. Naito, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and James, Judge, and Kamins, Judge. PER CURIAM Affirmed.
Cite as 307 Or App 454 (2020) 455
PER CURIAM Youth appeals an order under ORS 163A.030 requir- ing him to register as a sex offender. He contends that the juvenile court erred when it rejected his assertion that he was “rehabilitated and [did] not pose a threat to the safety of the public,” so as to preclude requiring him to register. ORS 163A.030(7)(b). Because youth had the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence on that point, the question for us on appeal is “whether any reasonable juvenile court could have found itself unpersuaded, on this record, that youth had established by clear and convincing evidence that he was rehabilitated and did not pose a public safety threat.” State v. A. L. M., 305 Or App 389, 404, 469 P3d 244 (2020). On this record, as in A. L. M., a reasonable juvenile court “could have found itself unpersuaded” that youth had made the required showing. Affirmed.