State v S. F.

Under ORS 426.130(1)(a), "in order to justify an involuntary commitment, the state must prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the individual is 'a person with mental illness.'"

Appellant challenged a judgement of involuntary commitment. Appellant assigned error to "the trial court's ruling that she was 'a person with mental illness.'" On appeal, Appellant argued that there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that she was a danger to herself and others. In response, the State conceded that there was not enough evidence to find that appellant was dangerous to herself but argued that there was sufficient evidence to conclude that appellant was a danger to others. Under ORS 426.130(1)(a), "in order to justify an involuntary commitment, the state must prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the individual is 'a person with mental illness.'" The Court of Appeals held that verbal threats without accompanying violent acts are not enough to constitute clear and convincing evidence that a mentally ill person is violent to others. State v. D. L. W., 244 Or App 401, 405, 260 P3d 691 (2011). Reversed.