In the Matter of T. T., a Person Alleged to have Mental Illness.
T. T., Appellant. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent,
Submitted March 21, 2017
County Circuit Court 16CC03459 Rafael A. Caso, Judge pro
E. Thompson and Ferder Casebeer French & Thompson, LLP,
fled the brief for appellant.
F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor
General, and Shannon T. Reel, Assistant Attorney General,
fled the brief for respondent.
DeHoog, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Chief Judge, and Aoyagi,
Summary: Appellant in this civil commitment case appeals an
order committing her to the custody of the Oregon Health
Authority for a period not to exceed 180 days. She asserts
that the trial court erred in determining that she was a
danger to others. Held: The evidence in the record
is legally sufficient to support the trial court's
determination that appellant posed a danger to others.
Or.App. 377] DEHOOG, P. J.
seeks reversal of an order committing her to the custody of
the Oregon Health Authority for a period not to exceed 180
days. See ORS 426.130. In her only assignment of
error, appellant contends that the trial court erred in
determining that she was a danger to others. See ORS
426.005(1)(f)(A). We conclude that the evidence in the record
is legally sufficient to support that determination;
accordingly, we affirm.
asks us to take de novo review of a particular
factual finding of the trial court. However, we decline to
exercise our discretion to do so. See ORS
19.415(3)(b) ("Upon an appeal in an equitable action or
proceeding * * * the Court of Appeals, acting in its sole
discretion, may try the cause anew upon the record or
make one or more factual findings anew upon the record."
(Emphasis added.)). Therefore, on review of the trial
court's ruling, "we view the evidence, as
supplemented and buttressed by permissible derivative
inferences, in the light most favorable to the trial
court's disposition and assess whether, when so viewed,
the record was legally sufficient to permit that
outcome." State v. S. R. J., 281 Or.App. 741,
743, 386 P.3d 99 (2016) (internal quotation marks omitted).
2016, appellant stabbed her husband in the hand with a knife;
the police subsequently transported her to the hospital. Upon
arrival at the emergency department, appellant was speaking
in rhymes and was unable to provide her name or date of
birth. She reported that she had stabbed her husband because
of a "covenant." She also reported that she was
experiencing auditory hallucinations and had thoughts about
hurting others. Appellant was covered in bruises on her arms
and legs, reportedly the result of her husband "holding
her down for several hours." According to appellant,
"he said he just wanted to help [her]."
appellant was in the hospital pending the commitment hearing,
the attending psychiatrist, Dr. Miller, made a diagnosis of
"Bipolar I Disorder, manic episode (first), severe with
psychosis." Miller noted that appellant's thought
content included "grandiose delusions," and that
she [293 Or.App. 378] had poor insight, was impulsive, had
impaired judgment, "[m]inimized and discounted [the]
injury to [her] spouse," and reported hallucinations,
though it was unclear if hallucinations were then currently
present. Appellant refused to take the medication that was
prescribed for her.
time of the stabbing, appellant was 24 years old and had been
married to her husband for seven years. They had two
children, one who was three years old and one who was six
months old. Appellant reported that she had been hearing
voices since her late teens and that, after the birth of her
second child, she had begun to experience increased symptoms
of depression and auditory hallucinations.
certified mental health investigator, Hudkins, conducted an
investigation and interviewed appellant twice before the
commitment hearing, which took place on June 6, 2016. Hudkins
prepared a report, which the court admitted without objection
at the hearing. Upon first meeting Hudkins in a safety room
at the hospital, appellant acknowledged that she had stabbed
her husband in the hand and described the events of that
night. She said that she "was dancing [and] spinning
around," had broken some dishes, and "went
psychotic for a moment." She stated that she was trying
to "play a part, to lead him" to get her husband to
see her point of view. Appellant also told Hudkins that she
and her husband had been involved in a "cult" for
many years, and stated that she was "brainwashed for
eight years." She further stated that she "felt
threatened by a predator in [her] house" and that the
predator was her husband. A short time later, appellant told
Hudkins that she felt safe with her husband, trusted him with
her life, and that he was the love of her life. She
acknowledged to Hudkins that she hears voices at times, but
declined to say what the voices said to her at any given
second time Hudkins met with appellant- which took place on
the basketball court at the psychiatric facility where she
was being treated-Hudkins observed appellant as she held the
broken end of a brush and sang into it as if it were a
microphone, then tossed it to the ground and began to dance
around. Appellant refused [293 Or.App. 379] Hudkins's
request to speak with her and instead continued to dance.
After Hudkins attempted a second time to engage appellant in
conversation, appellant told Hudkins that she did not trust
social workers and would not talk to her; she would only talk
to her attorney, who was supposed to come in later that day.
Appellant continued to dance, taking large animated steps in
circles around the basketball court. In her report, Hudkins
described appellant from that ...