IN RE: H. M. (2020)

Youth appeals an order under ORS 163A.030 requiring him to register as a sex offender. He contends that the juvenile court erred when it rejected his assertion that he was “rehabilitated and [did] not pose a threat to the safety of the public,” so as to preclude requiring him to register. ORS 163A.030(7)(b). Because youth had the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence on that point, the question for us on appeal is “whether any reasonable juvenile court could have found itself unpersuaded, on this record, that youth had established by clear and convincing evidence that he was rehabilitated and did not pose a public safety threat.” State v. A. L. M., 305 Or. App. 389, 404, 469 P.3d 244 (2020). On this record, as in A. L. M., a reasonable juvenile court “could have found itself unpersuaded” that youth had made the required showing.

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM