2017 ORS 427.255¹
Detention prior to investigation or hearing
  • care and maintenance while under custody

(1) If the court finds that there is probable cause to believe that the failure to take into custody pending an investigation or hearing a person alleged to have an intellectual disability and be in need of commitment for residential care, treatment and training would pose an imminent and serious danger to the person or to others, the court may issue a warrant of detention to either the community developmental disabilities program director or the sheriff of the county directing that the director, the sheriff or the designee of the director or sheriff take the person into custody and produce the person at the time and place stated in the warrant. At the time the person is taken into custody, the custodian shall advise the person or, if the person is incapacitated or a minor, the parents or guardian of the person of the person’s right to counsel, to have legal counsel appointed if the person is unable to afford legal counsel, and, if requested, to have legal counsel appointed immediately.

(2) A person taken into custody under subsection (1) of this section shall be provided all care, custody, evaluation and treatment required for the mental and physical health and safety of the person and the director of the facility retaining custody shall report any care, custody, evaluation or treatment provided the person to the court as required by ORS 427.280 (Treatment given after citation issued). Any diagnostic evaluation performed on such person shall be consistent with Department of Human Services rules and ORS 427.105 (Diagnostic evaluations). Any prescription or administration of drugs shall be the sole responsibility of the treating physician or naturopathic physician. The person shall have the right to the least hazardous treatment procedures while in custody, and the treating physician or naturopathic physician shall be notified immediately of the use of any mechanical restraints on the person. A note of each use of mechanical restraint and the reasons therefor shall be made a part of the person’s clinical record over the signature of the treating physician or naturopathic physician. [1979 c.683 §19; 2009 c.595 §444; 2011 c.658 §15; 2017 c.356 §51]

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Under Former Similar Statute

Release of patient’s confidential case records, (1974) Vol 36, p 1080

Chapter 427

Notes of Decisions

Former commit­ment pro­vi­sions of this chapter were constitu­tional. State ex rel Vandenberg v. Vandenberg, 48 Or App 609, 617 P2d 675 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

Standard of proof in former version of this chapter was proof “beyond a reasonable doubt.” State ex rel Vandenberg v. Vandenberg, 48 Or App 609, 617 P2d 675 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

As commit­ment pro­ceed­ing is not crim­i­nal matter, principle of double jeopardy has no applica­tion. State ex rel Vandenberg v. Vandenberg, 48 Or App 609, 617 P2d 675 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Preemp­tion of the Oregon Revised Statutes by the pro­vi­sions of the Interstate Compact, (1973) Vol 36, p 297; civil commit­ment to Mental Health Division of per­son against whom crim­i­nal charges are pending, (1980) Vol 41, p 91

Law Review Cita­tions

16 WLR 439 (1979)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 427—Persons With Intellectual or Developmental Disabilitie, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors427.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 427, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano427.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.