Court Opinion

ID: 9789775
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 01:41:07.646032+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:24.333691
License: Public Domain

RIGGS, J.,
dissenting.
On de novo review, I would find that the state proved by clear and convincing evidence that appellant cannot provide for his basic needs. ORS 426.005(2)(b); ORS 426.130(b).
Both medical examiners at the commitment hearing agreed that appellant is currently incapable of caring for himself. Appeflant’s treating physician described appellant’s disorganized and delusional thinking, which she felt would impair his ability to survive safely in his homeless lifestyle. Her testimony that appellant lacked insight into his illness and would not take medication was supported by appellant’s own testimony that he is not mentally ill.
Additional facts in the record support the medical examiners’ conclusion that appellant is unable to care for himself. He has been hospitalized more than 28 times in 14 years and has a consistently poor record of following treatment plans after release. The pre-commitment report characterized his family support as weak. Those facts, coupled with his recent delusional thinking and his present inability to organize his thoughts for more than a few minutes, make it *332highly probable that appellant cannot provide for his personal safety or follow through with his plans for independent living.
I dissent.