PER CURIAM.
In this mental commitment case, appellant contends that the trial court erred in finding that, because of a mental disorder, he is a danger to himself or others and is unable to meet his basic needs. ORS 426.005(1)(d). The state concedes that the record does not contain the necessary clear and convincing evidence to support the order of involuntary commitment. On de novo review, we agree and accept the concession.
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.