State v. Woolridge

102 Or. App. 559 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 25, 1990

Full text

In the Matter of John Woolridge, Alleged to be a Mentally Ill Person. STATE OF OREGON v. JOHN WOOLRIDGE

Opinions in this case

Opinion
Majority — Riggs

RIGGS, J. We allow the state’s motion for reconsideration of our opinion, 101 Or App 390, 790 P2d 1192 (1990), to correct a misquotation from State v. Allmendinger, 36 Or App 381, 383, 584 P2d 773 (1978) that appears at 101 Or App 395. What we intended to say is that mere threats of violence or verbal hostility may not be sufficient, standing alone, to show mental illness. We delete the sentence that followed the quotation in our former opinion. Reconsideration allowed; former opinion modified and adhered to as modified.

Notice

Freecase is a legal research tool. It does not determine whether a case is good law and does not provide legal advice.

Metadata

Status: Published
Author: Riggs
Judges: Edmonds, Graber, Riggs, Tempore
Cluster ID: 7035574

Citations

102 Or. App. 559
1990 Ore. App. LEXIS 859
794 P.2d 1258

Cited by

State v. J. P. (In re J. P.)
Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 5, 2018
State v. T. W. (In re T. W.)
Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 9, 2018

Freecase.ai provides legal information for educational and research purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Always consult a licensed attorney for legal guidance. Terms of Service

State v. L. R.

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 8, 2017

State v. K. J. B.

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 14, 2016

State v. M. A.

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 2, 2016

State v. D. L. W.

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 20, 2011

State v. B. P.

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 8, 2009

State v. M. R.

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 11, 2009

In Re Pb

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 14, 2007

State v. P. B.

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 14, 2007

State v. R. H.

Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 2, 2007

State v. King

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 31, 2001

Parentheticals

“The existence of a mental disorder alone is insufficient to constitute mental illness as defined by statute.”
State v. D. L. W.
an isolated threat, unaccompanied by any overt act to follow up the threat, is insufficient to establish future dangerousness
State v. R. H.
"The existence of a mental disorder alone is insufficient to constitute mental illness as defined by statute."
State v. D. L. W.
evidence not sufficient to support finding of danger to others when the appellant made threats to blow up mayor's house and office without any evidence he committed an overt act to follow up on the threats
State v. T. W. (In re T. W.)