Ray v. Bachik
Ray v. Bachik
Opinion of the Court
Petitioner appeals the dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. ORS 34.700. He contends that he is being confined with persons who have been charged with a crime in violation of ORS 426.140(1). The trial court held that the statute does not apply to confinement in a hospital. We affirm.
Petitioner has been civilly committed to the Mental Health and Developmental Disability Services Division. ORS 426.060 et seq. He is at the Oregon State Hospital in ward 48B. It is a maximum security ward that houses approximately 30 patients, most of whom have been committed to the hospital through the criminal justice system. Some have been found incompetent to stand trial on criminal charges, ORS 161.370(2), others are being evaluated to determine their competency, ORS 161.365(2), and others, after trial, have been found guilty except for insanity. ORS 161.305. The ward also houses six to eight patients who, like petitioner, have been civilly committed and are considered too dangerous for the community wards. Dr. Meyer, a staff physician, described the ward as the last resort for the mental health system. Petitioner was transferred to ward 48B because of his violent behavior, which included breaking the jaw of a staff member. Meyer testified that petitioner has been improving and will return to a community ward after three months have passed without any violent incidents.
ORS 426.140(1) provides:
“No person, not incarcerated upon a criminal charge, who has been adjudged a mentally ill person or one against whom commitment proceedings have been instituted shall be confined in any prison, jail or other inclosure where those charged with a crime or a violation of a municipal ordinance are incarcerated, unless the person represents an immediate and serious danger to staff or physical facilities of a hospital or other facility approved by the division for the care, custody and treatment of the person.”
The statute refers to two general types of institutions: prisons and hospitals. The statute requires that a civilly committed person be confined in a hospital, unless he presents such a danger to the hospital or staff that he must be confined in a prison.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.