Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.370 (2026)

Commencement and computation of term of imprisonment in state correctional institution; sentences concurrent unless court orders otherwise

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      137.370 Commencement and computation of term of imprisonment in state correctional institution; sentences concurrent unless court orders otherwise. (1) When a person is sentenced to imprisonment in the custody of the Department of Corrections, the term of confinement therein commences from the day the person is delivered to the custody of an officer of the Department of Corrections for the purpose of serving the sentence executed, regardless of whether the sentence is to be served in a state or federal institution.

      (2) Except as provided in subsections (3) and (4) of this section, when a person is sentenced to imprisonment in the custody of the Department of Corrections, for the purpose of computing the amount of sentence served the term of confinement includes only:

      (a) The time that the person is confined by any authority after the arrest for:

      (A) The crime for which sentence is imposed;

      (B) A lesser included or greater inclusive offense of the crime for which sentence was imposed; and

      (C) Any other crime constituting a violation of Oregon law within the same county designated by the sentencing court in the judgment as having been committed as part of the same criminal episode as the crime for which sentence was imposed; and

      (b) The time that the person is authorized by the Department of Corrections to spend outside a confinement facility, in a program conducted by or for the Department of Corrections.

      (3) When a judgment of conviction is vacated and a new sentence is thereafter imposed upon the defendant for the same crime, a lesser included or greater inclusive offense of the crime, or any crime constituting a violation of Oregon law within the same county designated by the sentencing court in the judgment as having been committed as part of the same criminal episode as the crime, the period of detention and imprisonment theretofore served shall be deducted from the maximum term, and from the minimum, if any, of the new sentence.

      (4) Unless the court expressly orders otherwise, a person who is confined as the result of a sentence for a crime or conduct that is not directly related to the crime for which the sentence is imposed, or for violation of the conditions of probation, parole or post-prison supervision, shall not receive presentence incarceration credit for the time served in jail toward service of the term of confinement.

      (5) Unless the court expressly orders otherwise, a term of imprisonment shall be concurrent with that portion of any sentence previously imposed that remains unexpired at the time the court imposes sentence. This subsection applies regardless of whether the earlier sentence was imposed by the same or any other court, and regardless of whether the earlier sentence is being or is to be served in the same penal institution or under the same correctional authority as will be the later sentence.

      (6) As used in this section, “criminal episode” has the meaning given that term in ORS 131.505. [Amended by 1955 c.660 §15; 1965 c.463 §19; 1967 c.232 §2; 1973 c.562 §2; 1973 c.631 §4; 1981 c.424 §2; 1987 c.251 §4; 1987 c.320 §35; 1995 c.657 §20; 2015 c.508 §§1,4]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 76 cases (22 in the last 5 years), 1959–2026 · leading case: State ex rel Torres-Lopez v. Fahrion, 373 Or. 816 (Or. 2025).
State ex rel Torres-Lopez v. Fahrion, 373 Or. 816 (Or. 2025). · cites it 66× “DOC appealed, contend- ing that the trial court had misinterpreted ORS 137.370 and thus erred when it issued the writ.”
Kellas v. Dep't of Corr., 145 P.3d 139 (Or. 2006). · cites it 3× “400 to assert that the refusal of DOC to grant time served credit to Brian for the period of his pretrial house arrest, pursuant to the administrative rules discussed above, was unlawful under ORS 137.370(2). That statute provides, in part: “Except as provided in subsections (3)…”
Holcomb v. Sunderland, 894 P.2d 457 (Or. 1995). · cites it 4× “390, which incorporated ORS 137.370 by reference. 2 ORS 137.320(4) provided: “When the judgment is imprisonment in the county jail * * *, the judgment shall be executed by the sheriff of the county.”
Arellano-Sanchez v. Thrasher, 374 Or. 623 (Or. 2025). · cites it 22× “Torres-Lopez addressed the con- struction of ORS 137.370(4), which provides: “Unless the court expressly orders otherwise, a person who is confined as the result of a sentence for a crime or conduct that is not directly related to the crime for which the sentence is imposed * *…”
Nissel v. Pearce, 764 P.2d 224 (Or. 1988). · cites it 4× “The Department then computes the prisoner's sentence according to the provisions of ORS 137.370. ORS 137.320(3). When a prisoner is imprisoned in the county jail, the sheriff computes the number of days the prisoner was imprisoned after arrest and before commencement of the…”
Plumb v. Prinslow, 847 F. Supp. 1509 (D. Or. 1994). · cites it 7× “Finally, to the extent OAR 255-25-010(4) purports to allow the Parole Board to refuse to advance the release date upon receipt of time served credits, that regulation is inconsistent with ORS 137.”
State v. DeCamp, 973 P.2d 922 (Or. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “310 to ORS 137.370. The significance of imposing sentences concurrently or consecutively is the effect on how the total term of confinement is computed.”
Rivas v. Persson, 304 P.3d 765 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 5× “320 and ORS 137.370 to credit plaintiff with the additional time served.”
State v. Hamlin, 950 P.2d 336 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 6× “4 See Ludwig, 218 Or at 487 (“ORS 137.370 provides that service of sentence begins when the prisoner is received at the penitentiary.”
Gage v. Maass, 759 P.2d 1049 (Or. 1988). · cites it 3× “That being so, argued defendant, there could be no way in which the Division could give credit under ORS 137.370 for the time spent in the county jail before delivery to the Division.”
State v. Perry, 914 P.2d 29 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 4× “390 (providing that the commencement, term and termination of a sentence of imprisonment in the county jail is to be ascertained by the rules prescribed in ORS 137.370). Oregon Laws 1993, chapter 802, section 4, provides, in part: “a judgment of imprisonment in the county jail…”
State ex rel Torres-Lopez v. Fahrion, 552 P.3d 135 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 12× “320(3) provides: “Upon receipt of the information described in subsection (1) or (2) of this section, the Department of Corrections shall establish a case file and compute the defendant’s sentence in accordance with the provisions of ORS 137.370.” 2 ORS 137.370 provides: “(1)…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.370(1) — 3 cases
State v. Hamlin, 950 P.2d 336 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). “4 See Ludwig, 218 Or at 487 (“ORS 137.370 provides that service of sentence begins when the prisoner is received at the penitentiary.”
Curtiss v. Dep't of Corr., 157 P.3d 279 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
Gray v. Oregon State Bd. of Parole, 694 P.2d 572 (Or. Ct. App. 1985).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.370(2) — 11 cases
Kellas v. Dep't of Corr., 145 P.3d 139 (Or. 2006). “400 to assert that the refusal of DOC to grant time served credit to Brian for the period of his pretrial house arrest, pursuant to the administrative rules discussed above, was unlawful under ORS 137.370(2). That statute provides, in part: “Except as provided in subsections (3)…”
Sanders v. Brown, 452 P.3d 1032 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
Chambers v. Maass, 758 P.2d 393 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
Plumb v. Prinslow, 847 F. Supp. 1509 (D. Or. 1994). “Finally, to the extent OAR 255-25-010(4) purports to allow the Parole Board to refuse to advance the release date upon receipt of time served credits, that regulation is inconsistent with ORS 137.”
State v. McEahern, 867 P.2d 568 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.370(2)(a) — 14 cases
Kellas v. Dep't of Corr., 145 P.3d 139 (Or. 2006). “400 to assert that the refusal of DOC to grant time served credit to Brian for the period of his pretrial house arrest, pursuant to the administrative rules discussed above, was unlawful under ORS 137.370(2). That statute provides, in part: “Except as provided in subsections (3)…”
State ex rel Torres-Lopez v. Fahrion, 373 Or. 816 (Or. 2025). “DOC appealed, contend- ing that the trial court had misinterpreted ORS 137.370 and thus erred when it issued the writ.”
Holcomb v. Sunderland, 894 P.2d 457 (Or. 1995). “390, which incorporated ORS 137.370 by reference. 2 ORS 137.320(4) provided: “When the judgment is imprisonment in the county jail * * *, the judgment shall be executed by the sheriff of the county.”
Plumb v. Prinslow, 847 F. Supp. 1509 (D. Or. 1994). “Finally, to the extent OAR 255-25-010(4) purports to allow the Parole Board to refuse to advance the release date upon receipt of time served credits, that regulation is inconsistent with ORS 137.”
Rivas v. Persson, 304 P.3d 765 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “320 and ORS 137.370 to credit plaintiff with the additional time served.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.370(2)(b) — 1 case
Haas v. Hathaway, 928 P.2d 331 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.370(3) — 5 cases
Wallett v. Thompson, 998 P.2d 1273 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
Ramoz v. Bd. of Parole, 340 Or. App. 200 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
Ramoz v. Bd. of Parole, 340 Or. App. 200 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
State v. Beckner, 520 P.3d 906 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
Myers v. Peterson, 744 F. Supp. 976 (D. Or. 1989).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.370(4) — 18 cases
State ex rel Torres-Lopez v. Fahrion, 373 Or. 816 (Or. 2025). “DOC appealed, contend- ing that the trial court had misinterpreted ORS 137.370 and thus erred when it issued the writ.”
Arellano-Sanchez v. Thrasher, 374 Or. 623 (Or. 2025). “Torres-Lopez addressed the con- struction of ORS 137.370(4), which provides: “Unless the court expressly orders otherwise, a person who is confined as the result of a sentence for a crime or conduct that is not directly related to the crime for which the sentence is imposed * *…”
Fletes v. Thrasher, 374 Or. 735 (Or. 2026).
State ex rel Torres-Lopez v. Fahrion, 374 Or. 423 (Or. 2025).
State ex rel Torres-Lopez v. Fahrion, 552 P.3d 135 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “320(3) provides: “Upon receipt of the information described in subsection (1) or (2) of this section, the Department of Corrections shall establish a case file and compute the defendant’s sentence in accordance with the provisions of ORS 137.370.” 2 ORS 137.370 provides: “(1)…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.370(5) — 6 cases
State v. Perry, 914 P.2d 29 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). “390 (providing that the commencement, term and termination of a sentence of imprisonment in the county jail is to be ascertained by the rules prescribed in ORS 137.370). Oregon Laws 1993, chapter 802, section 4, provides, in part: “a judgment of imprisonment in the county jail…”
State v. Logston, 374 Or. 101 (Or. 2025).
State v. Hamlin, 950 P.2d 336 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). “4 See Ludwig, 218 Or at 487 (“ORS 137.370 provides that service of sentence begins when the prisoner is received at the penitentiary.”
State v. French, 145 P.3d 305 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
State v. Lebeck, 17 P.3d 504 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
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.