State v. C. L. (In re C. L.)

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
Citation495 P.3d 748,313 Or.App. 539
Docket NumberA174596
Parties In the MATTER OF C. L., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. State of Oregon, Respondent, v. C. L., Appellant.
Decision Date28 July 2021

313 Or.App. 539
495 P.3d 748

In the MATTER OF C. L., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness.

State of Oregon, Respondent,
v.
C. L., Appellant.

A174596

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Submitted June 29, 2021
July 28, 2021


Alexander C. Cambier and Multnomah Defenders, Inc., filed the brief for appellant.

Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Daniel Norris, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and James, Judge, and Kamins, Judge.

JAMES, J.

495 P.3d 749
313 Or.App. 540

Appellant appeals from an order finding him to be a person with a mental illness that is dangerous to others and committing him to the custody of the Oregon Health Authority for a period not to exceed 180 days. Appellant has not asked us to exercise de novo review pursuant to ORS 19.415(3), and this is not an appropriate case to do so. Accordingly, we look to whether "the evidence, as supplemented and buttressed by permissible derivative inferences, in the light most favorable to the trial court's disposition and assess whether, when so viewed, the record was legally sufficient to permit that outcome." State v. M. A ., 276 Or. App. 624, 625, 371 P.3d 495 (2016). We find the evidence here sufficient and affirm.

Appellant has a long and documented history of schizophrenia. However, there is only one documented incident of actual violence by appellant. On Thanksgiving of 2018, appellant, while having delusions, "slugged" his sister on "the side of the head." As a result of that incident, the state filed criminal charges against appellant, and he entered mental health court.

Appellant initially did well in mental health court. However, in the beginning of 2020, appellant discontinued taking his medication and self-medicated with marijuana. As a result, the record shows increased paranoid and concerning behavior by appellant. Over six months, beginning in 2020, appellant was admitted to the hospital three times for mental health treatment. By August 2020, defendant's mental health had deteriorated to the point that he could no longer safely participate in mental health court.

Prior to a hearing determining his continuation in mental health court, appellant "was pacing and talking to people who were not there." Appellant confronted the mental health court's prosecutor in the courthouse hallway causing the prosecutor to fear for her safety, such that she sought refuge in the court's chambers and in a locked attorneys’ room. During the hearing, appellant angrily told the prosecutor that "she was exhausting her right to live." The prosecutor described how appellant's threats frightened her and she later informed the district attorney that she would not

313 Or.App. 541

appear in court with appellant unless armed security was present.

In July 2020, defendant sent his sister text messages telling her he wanted to kill her and asked her to "Make it easy for me. Meet me somewhere so I can slit your throat."

On August 7, 2020, a witness called police after appellant told the witness, numerous times, that the neighbors had been ruining his life since he was 10 or 11. And, he said "I'm going to take a gun and I'm going to go shoot them."

Around August 12, 2020, police received several calls expressing concern over appellant's behavior. The witness, who had earlier reported the threats to shoot the neighbors, woke up to appellant screaming. The witness testified that she "took a step outside and I could start to hear everything very clearly. And, most of it...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • State v. K. M. (In re K. M.)
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Oregon
    • September 15, 2021
    ...on the basis of danger to others requires the state to prove " ‘that actual future violence is highly likely.’ " State v. C. L. , 313 Or. App. 539, 542, 495 P.3d 748 (2021) (quoting State v. M. A ., 276 Or. App. 624, 629, 371 P.3d 495 (2016) ). While "[s]pecific acts of violence are not req......
  • State v. K. M. (In re K.M.), A172499
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Oregon
    • September 15, 2021
    ...on the basis of danger to others requires the state to prove "'that actual future violence is highly likely.'" State v. C. L., 313 Or.App. 539, 542, __P.3d__(2021) (quoting State v. M. A., 276 Or.App. 624, 629, 371 P.3d 495 (2016)). While "[s]pecific acts of violence are not required" to pr......
  • State v. Price
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Oregon
    • August 18, 2021
  • In re C. L., A174596
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Oregon
    • July 28, 2021
    ...313 Or.App. 539 In the Matter of C. L., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. C. L., Appellant. A174596Court of Appeals of OregonJuly 28, Submitted June 29, 2021 Coos County Circuit Court 6987; Megan Jacquot, Judge. Alexander C. Cambier and Multnomah Defen......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT