State v. Z.A.B. (In re Z.A.B.), 14MH0001
Decision Date | 21 August 2014 |
Docket Number | A156148.,14MH0001 |
Citation | 266 Or.App. 708,338 P.3d 802 (Mem) |
Parties | In the Matter of Z.A.B., Alleged to be a Mentally Ill Person. State of Oregon, Respondent, v. Z.A.B., Appellant. |
Court | Oregon Court of Appeals |
Garrett A. Richardson and Multnomah Defenders, Inc., for appellant's petition.
Before LAGESEN, Presiding Judge, and TOOKEY, Judge, and EDMONDS, Senior Judge.
Appellant has petitioned for reconsideration of our opinion in State v. Z.A.B., 264 Or.App. 779, 334 P.3d 480 (2014). In that case, we accepted the state's concession of error, and exercised our discretion to reverse the trial court's decision to commit appellant to the Addiction and Mental Health Division of the Oregon Health Authority for a period not to exceed 180 days pursuant to ORS 426.130(1)(a)(C). In his petition for reconsideration, appellant points out that we did not address a second order that was also the subject of the appeal: an order prohibiting appellant from purchasing or possessing firearms pursuant to ORS 426.130(1)(a)(D). He argues that our reversal of the commitment decision necessarily requires reversal of the firearms order, because the statutory authority to prohibit the purchase or possession of firearms under ORS 426.130(1)(a)(D) requires a determination that a person is a “person with mental illness” under ORS 426.005(1)(e) —just as is required for an order of commitment under ORS 426.130(1)(a)(C).
We agree with appellant. See State v. W.B., 264 Or.App. 777, 778, 333 P.3d 1099 (2014) (). Accordingly, we allow reconsideration and modify our opinion as follows:
We delete the following sentence, which appears at 264 Or.App. at 780, 334 P.3d 480 : “Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing him for a period not to exceed 180 days pursuant to ORS 426.130.”
In its place, we substitute:
“Appellant seeks reversal of an order committing him for a period not to exceed 180 days pursuant to ORS 426.130(1)(a)(C) and an order prohibiting him from purchasing or possessing firearms pursuant to ORS 426.130(1)(a)(D).”
Reconsideration allowed; former opinion modified and adhered to as modified.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. K.M. (In re K. M.)
...of a full and fair hearing); State v. Z.A.B., 264 Or.App. 779, 780, 334 P.3d 480, adh'd to as modified on recons., 266 Or.App. 708, 338 P.3d 802, 2014 WL 5473850 (2014) (failure to advise of right to subpoena witnesses alone sufficient plain error to justify reversal); State v. B.T., 262 Or......
-
State v. D.B. (In re D.B.)
...(Internal quotation marks omitted.)); State v. Z.A.B., 264 Or.App. 779, 780, 334 P.3d 480, adh'd to as modified on recons., 266 Or.App. 708, 338 P.3d 802 (2014) (failure to advise of right to subpoena witnesses alone constitutes plain error justifying reversal); State v. M.L.R., 256 Or.App.......
-
State v. H. D. (In re H. D.)
...both the commitment order and the order prohibiting appellant from purchasing and possessing firearms. See State v. Z. A. B. , 266 Or. App. 708, 709, 338 P.3d 802 (2014) (" ‘Finding that an individual "is a person with mental illness" is a condition precedent to the issuance of an order pro......
-
State v. J. D. P. (In re J. D. P.), A163511
...results of the proceedings was plain error"); State v. Z. A. B. , 264 Or.App. 779, 780, 334 P.3d 480, adh'd to as modified on recons. , 266 Or.App. 708, 338 P.3d 802 (2014) (failure to inform a person of the right to subpoena witnesses constitutes plain error). We agree that the error is pl......