LAW.coLAW.co

In the Matter of H. S. L., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. STATE of Oregon, Respondent, v. H. S. L., Appellant.

Court of Appeals of Oregon2018-06-06No. A164036
419 P.3d 808292 Or. App. 329

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

PER CURIAM

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing him to the custody of the Mental Health Division for a period not to exceed 180 days. See ORS 426.130. In his second assignment of error, appellant contends that the trial court plainly erred when it failed to advise him of the possible results of the commitment hearing as required by ORS 426.100(1). Specifically, he asserts that the trial court plainly erred when it failed to inform him of the possibility of voluntary treatment and conditional release. In response, the state concedes that, under State v. M. M. , 288 Or. App. 111, 405 P.3d 192 (2017), and State v. M. S. R. , 288 Or. App. 156, 403 P.3d 809 (2017), the trial courts failure to advise appellant of all of the possible results of the proceeding, as required by ORS 426.100(1), is plain error. We agree that the error is plain, and-for the reasons set forth in M. M. and M. S. R. -exercise our discretion to correct the error. Our disposition of appellants second assignment of error obviates the need to address his first and third assignments of error.

Reversed.