Full text
State v. J. A.
506 June 26, 2024 No. 446
This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON
In the Matter of J. A., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. J. A., Appellant. Clackamas County Circuit Court 23CC05989; A182628
Heather Karabeika, Judge. Submitted May 13, 2024. Liza Langford filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Emily N. Snook, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Lagesen, Chief Judge and Egan, Judge. EGAN, J. Reversed.
Nonprecedential Memo Op: 333 Or App 506 (2024) 507
EGAN, J. Appellant appeals a judgment committing her to the Oregon Health Authority for a period not to exceed 180 days. The trial court entered that judgment after finding that appellant suffered from a mental illness and that she posed a danger to herself or others. We reverse the judgment.1 Appellant argues that the state did not meet its burden of showing that she posed a danger to others due to a qualifying mental disorder. The state concedes that the record lacks sufficient evidence that appellant suffered from a mental disorder under ORS 426.005(1)(f). We agree with and accept the state’s concession. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s disposition, there was evidence that appellant suffers from an intellec- tual or developmental disability, but the state failed to show that she suffered from a mental disorder that required civil commitment. See State v. A. B. K., 323 Or App 246, 248-53, 522 P3d 894 (2022) (explaining that developmental disabil- ities fail to support commitment under ORS chapter 426; instead, such cases should be litigated under ORS chapter 427). We reverse the judgment of commitment because “the civil commitment procedures in ORS chapter 426 are not intended to encompass people diagnosed solely with a devel- opmental disability.” Id. at 254. Reversed.
1 As authorized by ORS 2.570(2)(b), this matter is determined by a two-judge panel.