Persons With Mental Illness

ORS 426.135
Counsel on appeal

  • costs of appeal

If a person determined to be a person with mental illness as provided in ORS 426.130 (Court determination of mental illness), or determined to be an extremely dangerous person with mental illness under ORS 426.701 (Commitment of “extremely dangerous” person with mental illness) or 426.702 (Discharge from commitment of extremely dangerous person with mental illness), appeals the determination or the disposition, and is determined to be financially eligible for appointed counsel at state expense, upon request of the person or upon its own motion, the court shall appoint suitable legal counsel to represent the person. The compensation for legal counsel and costs and expenses necessary to the appeal shall be determined and paid by the public defense services executive director as provided in ORS 135.055 (Compensation and expenses of appointed counsel) if the circuit court is the appellate court or as provided in ORS 138.500 (Appointment of counsel and furnishing of transcript for appellant without funds) if the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court is the appellate court. The compensation, costs and expenses shall be paid as provided in ORS 138.500 (Appointment of counsel and furnishing of transcript for appellant without funds). [1979 c.867 §12; 1981 s.s. c.3 §134; 1985 c.502 §25; 2001 c.962 §58; 2013 c.715 §§6,17]
§§ 426.070 to 426.170

Notes of Decisions

Where defendant in involuntary commitment proceeding asserted he was denied due process because investigator misled him as to how soon hearing would take place and did not take long enough to complete investigation but defendant did not assert that investigation report was inaccurate or incomplete, due process violation was not established. State v. Pieretti, 110 Or App 379, 823 P2d 426 (1991), Sup Ct review denied

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Mental Health Division recognition of commitment order issued by Indian tribal court, (1979) Vol 40, p 31

Law Review Citations

53 OLR 245-270 (1974)

§§ 426.005 to 426.395

Notes of Decisions

The doctor-patient privilege applies under these sections. State v. O'Neill, 274 Or 59, 545 P2d 97 (1976)

Prior to commitment there must be evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual is mentally ill as defined. State v. O'Neill, 274 Or 59, 545 P2d 97 (1976)

The Oregon commitment statutes are not unconstitutional on the grounds of vagueness or as an invasion of privacy as protected by the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. State v. O'Neill, 274 Or 59, 545 P2d 97 (1976)

Oregon Constitution did not require jury in mental commitment hearings. State v. Mills, 36 Or App 727, 585 P2d 1143 (1978), Sup Ct review denied

Alleged mentally ill person does not have right to remain silent in civil commitment proceeding. State v. Matthews, 46 Or App 757, 613 P2d 88 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

Law Review Citations

9 WLJ 63-85 (1973)

Chapter 426

Notes of Decisions

The entire statutory scheme of involuntary commitment provides adequate procedural safeguards which satisfies the requirements of due process and equal protection. Dietrich v. Brooks, 27 Or App 821, 558 P2d 357 (1976), Sup Ct review denied

Atty. Gen. Opinions

County of residence paying mental commitment costs, (1979) Vol 40, p 147; civil commitment to Mental Health Division of person against whom criminal charges are pending, (1980) Vol 41, p 91

Law Review Citations

16 WLR 448 (1979)


Last accessed
Jun. 26, 2021