Case Name: In the Matter of R. K., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. STATE of Oregon, Respondent, v. R. K., Appellant.
Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 2018-09-19
Citations: 426 P.3d 257
Docket Number: A166742
Parties: In the Matter of R. K., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness.
Judges: Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and DeVore, Judge, and James, Judge.
Reporter: Pacific Reporter 3d
Volume: 426
Pages: 257–257

Head Matter:
In the Matter of R. K., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness.
STATE of Oregon, Respondent,
v.
R. K., Appellant.
A166742
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
Submitted August 3, 2018.
September 19, 2018
Joseph R. DeBin and Multnomah Defenders, Inc., filed the brief for appellant.
Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Patrick M. Ebbett, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and DeVore, Judge, and James, Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
The trial court committed appellant to the custody of the Mental Health Division for a period not to exceed 180 days and entered an order prohibiting appellant from purchasing or possessing firearms after determining that he was a danger to others and unable to provide for his basic needs because of a mental disorder. See ORS 426.005 (1)(f)(A), (B). On appeal, he argues that the record does not contain legally sufficient evidence to support the involuntary commitment. The state concedes that the record is legally insufficient in that regard and that the judgment of commitment should be reversed. We agree, accept the state's concession, and reverse the commitment judgment and the order prohibiting the purchase or possession of firearms. See State v. R. C. S. , 291 Or. App. 489, 490, 415 P.3d 1164 (2018) (reversing both the commitment judgment and the order prohibiting the appellant from purchasing or possessing firearms).
Reversed.
Our disposition obviates the need to reach appellant's other assignment of error.