State v. R. I. O.'B. (In re R. I. O.'B.)

Full title: In the Matter of R. I. O.'B., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness…

Court: COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

Date published: Aug 1, 2018

293 Or. App. 225 (Or. Ct. App. 2018)

422 P.3d 432

Opinion

A162772

08-01-2018

In the Matter of R. I. O.’B., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. STATE of Oregon, Respondent, v. R. I. O.’B., Appellant.

Joseph DeBin and Multnomah Defenders, Inc., filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Jona J. Maukonen, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Joseph DeBin and Multnomah Defenders, Inc., filed the brief for appellant.

Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Jona J. Maukonen, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Tookey, Judge, and Shorr, Judge.

PER CURIAMAppellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing him to the custody of the Mental Health Division for a period not to exceed 180 days. ORS 426.130. Appellant contends that the trial court plainly erred by failing to advise him of all the possible results of the proceedings as required by ORS 426.100(1)(c), including the possibility of conditional release or voluntary treatment. The state concedes that, under State v. M. M. , 288 Or. App. 111, 114-16, 405 P.3d 192 (2017), and State v. M. S. R. , 288 Or. App. 156, 157, 403 P.3d 809 (2017), the trial court committed plain error that warrants reversal. We agree with the state, accept the concession, and, for the reasons stated in those cases, exercise our discretion to correct the error. Because we reverse the judgment on that basis, we do not address appellant’s first assignment of error.

Reversed.