IN RE: J. F. (2020)

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing him to the custody of the Mental Health Division for a period not to exceed 180 days. See ORS 426.130. In his sole assignment of error, appellant contends that the trial court plainly erred when it failed to advise him of the information required by ORS 426.100(1). Specifically, he asserts that the trial court plainly erred when it failed to advise him of the possible results of the commitment hearing, including the possibilities of voluntary treatment or conditional release. In response, the state concedes that the trial court's failure to advise appellant of the information required by ORS 426.100(1) is plain error. See State v. M. M., 288 Or. App. 111, 116, 405 P.3d 192 (2017) (holding that “the trial court's failure to advise appellant of all of the possible results of the proceedings was plain error”). We agree that the error is plain and, for the reasons stated in M. M., we conclude that it is appropriate to exercise our discretion to correct the error. 288 Or. App. at 116, 405 P.3d 192; see also State v. J. R. B., 290 Or. App. 858, 863, 418 P.3d 38 (2018) (exercising discretion to correct plain error for failure to comply with ORS 426.100(1)). Consequently, we reverse the judgment.

Reversed.

PER CURIAM