426.160
Disclosure of record of commitment proceeding. (1) The court having jurisdiction
over any proceeding conducted pursuant to ORS 426.005, 426.060, 426.070 to
426.170, 426.217, 426.228, 426.273 to 426.292, 426.300, 426.301 to 426.307,
426.309, 426.315, 426.385, 426.395, 426.701 or 426.702 may not disclose any
part of the record of the proceeding or commitment to any person except:
(a) The court
shall, pursuant to rules adopted by the Department of State Police, transmit
the minimum information necessary, as defined in ORS 181A.290, to the
Department of State Police for persons described in ORS 181A.290 (1)(a) or (b)
to enable the department to access and maintain the information and transmit
the information to the federal government as required under federal law;
(b) As provided
in ORS 426.070 (5)(c), 426.130 (4) or 426.170;
(c) On request of
the person subject to the proceeding;
(d) On request of
the person’s legal representative or legal counsel or the attorney for the
state; or
(e) Pursuant to
court order.
(2) In any
proceeding described in subsection (1) of this section that is before the
Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals, the limitations on disclosure imposed by
this section apply to the appellate court record and to the trial court record
while it is in the appellate court’s custody. The appellate court may disclose
information from the trial or appellate court record in a decision, as defined
in ORS 19.450, provided that the court uses initials, an alias or some other
convention for protecting against public disclosure the identity of the person
subject to the proceeding. [Amended by 1965 c.420 §1; 1969 c.148 §1; 1973 c.838
§21; 1993 c.223 §11; 1993 c.484 §19; 1995 c.498 §3; 2009 c.826 §2; 2011 c.332 §§1,6a;
2011 c.547 §45; 2013 c.715 §§7,18; 2025 c.559 §23]
Notes of Decisions
State v. Y. B. (In re Y. B.), 439 P.3d 1036 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 5× “The statutes governing civil commitment hearings used to place the obligation of creating a full record of any proceedings squarely on the trial judge, relieving appellants in civil commitment cases of the usual obligation to ensure completeness of the record below.”
State v. K.J.B. (In re K.J.B.), 416 P.3d 291 (Or. 2018).
“Although ORS 426.160 does put limits on the availability of the judicial record of commitment, it is no secret that defendant was committed ***.”
State v. B. A. F. (In re B. A. F.), 414 P.3d 486 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
“See ORS 426.160. Furthermore, the state contends that there is "good reason to question whether the reasoning in Van Tassel regarding the social effect of an involuntary commitment remains intact in light of changing societal attitudes toward mental illness and its treatment.”
State v. Collman, 497 P.2d 1233 (Or. Ct. App. 1972).
· cites it 3× “⑤ Prior to 1965 this section read: ORS 426.160. “The judge shall cause to be recorded in the court records a full account of proceedings had at the hearing and examination, together with the judgment and order of the court and a copy of the orders issued.”
Matter of Matthews, 613 P.2d 88 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
“Right to receive a copy of the investigation report and any treatment report prior to the hearing. ORS 426.070(4), 426.075. 10. The investigation report can only be introduced in evidence with the express consent of the person.”
State v. Cutri, 56 P.3d 955 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 6× “According to appellate counsel, trial counsel was uncooperative and thus no light was shed on the whereabouts of the transcript, if one exists, or what transpired at the hearing.”
State v. Obalo, 41 P.3d 458 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 4× “The transcript of the remaining part of the hearing contains a portion of a social worker’s testimony, a medical examiner’s interview of appellant, the parties’ final arguments, and the court’s findings.”
State v. Anderson, 534 P.2d 1159 (Or. Ct. App. 1975).
“ORS 426.160, referring to hearings concerning commitment of the mentally ill, provides: “The judge shall cause to be recorded in the court records a full account of proceedings had at all hearings and examinations * * In State v.”
State v. Rowe, 497 P.2d 1230 (Or. Ct. App. 1972).
“The state also concedes that this was error in view of ORS 426.160 which provides: “The judge shall cause to be recorded in the court records a full account of proceedings had at the hearing and examination * * Reversed and remanded.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.