State v. A. P. K.

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
422 August 15, 2018 No. 406 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON In the Matter of A. P. K., aka A. P. K., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. A. P. K., aka A. P. K., Appellant. Lane County Circuit Court 16CC06843; A163770 Maurice K. Merten, Judge. Submitted June 1, 2018. Joseph R. DeBin and Multnomah Defenders, Inc., filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Rebecca M. Auten, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Garrett, Judge, and Powers, Judge. PER CURIAM Reversed. Cite as 293 Or App 422 (2018) 423 PER CURIAM In this appeal, appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing him to the Mental Health Division for a period not to exceed 180 days. See ORS 426.130. He contends, in an unpreserved assignment of error, that the judgment should be reversed because the trial court failed to inform him, as required by ORS 426.100(1)(c), of some of the possible results of the hearing. The state concedes the error, and we agree that the court’s failure to fully comply with ORS 426.100(1) constitutes plain error. See State v. Ritzman, 192 Or App 296, 298-99, 84 P3d 1129 (2004) (failure to advise a person directly regarding the rights listed in ORS 426.100(1) or conduct an examination on the record to determine whether a valid waiver of the right to be advised has been knowingly and voluntarily made is plain error). We further conclude, for the reasons stated in State v. M. L. R., 256 Or App 566, 570-72, 303 P3d 954 (2013) (nature of the civil commitment proceedings, the gravity of the violation, the ends of justice, and the lack of harmless error), that it is appropriate to exercise our discretion to correct the error.1 Reversed.   Our disposition obviates the need to address appellant’s other assignments of error. 1

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.