- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Civil Commitment
- Date Filed: 01-21-2021
- Case #: A164507
- Judge(s)/Court Below: DeHoog, P.J. for the Court; DeVore, J.; & Aoyagi, J.
- Full Text Opinion
Appellant sought “reversal of an order committing him” to the Oregon Health Authority for 180 days. On appeal, Appellant argued that the evidence was insufficient to support the trial court’s findings that he “was a danger to others” and “unable to provide for his basic personal needs” due to a mental disorder. In order to commit someone because of dangerousness to others, "there must be a causal connection between” the person’s mental disorder and his allegedly dangerous behavior; the person must be “highly likely to engage” in actual, “future violence towards others.” State v. D. A. H., 241 Or App 391, 398, 250 P3d 423 (2011); State v. S. E. R., 297 Or App 121, 122, 441 P3d 254 (2019). To commit someone based on inability to provide for basic personal needs, the State must show that the inability to provide will place the person in danger of serious physical harm in the near future. State v. M. A. E., 299 Or App 231, 240, 448 P3d 656 (2019). The Court found that Appellant’s alleged sexual assault of his ex-girlfriend was not causally connected to his mental illness and that Appellant was not “highly likely to engage” in violence based on a single incident with a knife. The Court further found that, although he had lost his food stamp card, Appellant was sufficiently able to provide for his basic personal needs. Thus, the Court held that the evidence did not support civil commitment. Reversed.