State v. L. D. (In re L. D.), A172948

• Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon
• Citation: 484 P.3d 1100,310 Or.App. 347
• Docket Number: A172948
• Parties: In the MATTER OF L. D., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. State of Oregon, Respondent, v. L. D., Appellant.
• Decision Date: 31 March 2021

310 Or.App. 347
484 P.3d 1100

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

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

A172948

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Submitted September 28, 2020.
March 31, 2021

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

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

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

KAMINS, J.

310 Or.App. 348

Appellant appeals a judgment involuntarily committing her to the Oregon Health Authority for up to 180 days. Because the record was legally sufficient to allow a rational factfinder to conclude that appellant suffered from a mental disorder that makes her a danger to herself, we affirm.

Absent de novo review, "we view 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. J. F ., 306 Or. App. 544, 545, 473 P.3d 1141 (2020) (internal quotation marks omitted). "[W]hether the evidence is sufficient to support a determination that appellant is a danger to [self] is a question we review as a matter of law." Id . at 546, 473 P.3d 1141 (internal quotation marks omitted).

Appellant, who has been diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, suffered from suicidal ideations, including "command hallucinations" telling her to run into traffic and kill herself. Her medical records document a "consistent pattern" of acting impulsively in response to these delusions, including instances of running into traffic. Approximately one month before the hospitalization leading to this commitment hearing, appellant ran into traffic again. On that day she told her provider: "I want to kill myself. I want to die. I hate my life. I'm going to run into traffic." At the hearing, when the court asked her why she ran into traffic, she responded that she "was trying to kill [her]self, of course."

The trial court concluded that appellant was a person with a mental illness and presented a danger to herself:

"The reason for that is based on the statements that she made initially at the outset of this hearing where she did in fact endorse a desire to kill herself. And, the doctor testified that she had also

...