Case Name: In the Matter of T. P. D., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness. STATE of Oregon, Respondent, v. T. P. D., Appellant.
Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 2018-06-06
Citations: 419 P.3d 806
Docket Number: A165847
Parties: In the Matter of T. P. D., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness.
Judges: Before Hadlock, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and Aoyagi, Judge.
Reporter: Pacific Reporter 3d
Volume: 419
Pages: 806–806

Head Matter:
In the Matter of T. P. D., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness.
STATE of Oregon, Respondent,
v.
T. P. D., Appellant.
A165847
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
Submitted April 6, 2018.
June 6, 2018
Joseph R. DeBin and Multnomah Defenders, Inc., filed the brief for appellant.
Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Jona J. Maukonen, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Hadlock, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and Aoyagi, Judge.

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 only 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 advise him of the possibilities of voluntary treatment or 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 court's 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.
Reversed.