IN RE: R. C. S. (2021)

Appellant appeals a judgment of the trial court committing him to the custody of the Oregon Health Authority for a period not to exceed 180 days and prohibiting him from purchasing or possessing firearms. See ORS 426.130. He asserts that the trial court plainly erred in failing to advise him of all of the possible outcomes of the commitment proceeding, as ORS 426.100(1) requires, in particular, the possibilities of voluntary treatment or conditional release. The state concedes that the court erred in that regard and that the judgment should be reversed. We agree and accept the state's concession. State v. M. M., 288 Or. App. 111, 116, 405 P.3d 192 (2017) (trial court's failure to advise appellant of all of the possible results of civil commitment proceeding is plain error). And, for the reasons stated in M. M.—that is, “the nature of civil commitment proceedings, the relative interests of the parties in those proceedings, the gravity of the violation, and the ends of justice”—we exercise our discretion to correct the error. Id.; see also State v. M. L. R., 256 Or. App. 566, 570-71, 303 P.3d 954 (2013) (holding that the “failure to provide a person with all of the information required by ORS 426.100(1) constitutes an egregious error that justifies plain error review”). Accordingly, we reverse the judgment.

Reversed.

PER CURIAM