137.520 Power
of committing magistrate to parole and grant temporary release to persons
confined in county jail; authority of sheriff to release persons confined in
county jail; disposition of work release earnings. (1) The committing magistrate,
having sentenced a defendant to confinement in a county jail for a period of up
to one year, or as provided by rules adopted by the Oregon Criminal Justice
Commission for felonies committed on or after November 1, 1989, may parole the
defendant outside the county jail subject to condition and subject to being
taken back into confinement upon the breach of such condition. When a court
paroles a defendant under this subsection and the defendant is serving a
sentence or sanction imposed under ORS 423.478 (2)(d) or (e), the court may
order the local supervisory authority to supervise the defendant. The
committing magistrate may also authorize, limit or prohibit the release of a
sentenced defendant upon pass, furlough, leave, work or educational release.
(2) The
committing magistrate, having sentenced a defendant to probation and having
confined the defendant as a condition of that probation in a county jail for a
period up to one year, or having imposed a sentence of probation with
confinement in the county jail in accordance with rules adopted by the Oregon
Criminal Justice Commission for felonies committed on or after November 1,
1989, may authorize, limit or prohibit the release of such person upon pass,
furlough, leave, work or educational release.
(3) The sheriff
of a county in which a defendant is confined in the county jail by sentence or
as a condition of probation may allow the release of the defendant upon pass,
furlough, leave, work or educational release unless otherwise ordered by the
committing magistrate.
(4) A defendant
confined in a county jail and placed upon educational release or upon work
release shall, during the hours in which not so engaged or employed, be
confined in the county jail unless the court by order otherwise directs or
unless the sheriff otherwise directs in the absence of a contrary order by the
court. The defendant’s net earnings shall be paid to the sheriff, who shall
deduct therefrom and pay such sums as may be ordered by the court for the
defendant’s board, restitution, fine, support of dependents and necessary
personal expense. Any balance remaining shall be retained by the sheriff until
the defendant’s discharge from custody, whereupon the balance shall be paid to
the defendant. [Amended by 1959 c.345 §1; 1973 c.836 §270; 1981 c.568 §1; 1989
c.790 §15; 1993 c.14 §8; 1999 c.661 §1]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
13
cases, 1975–2013 · leading case:
State v. Johnston, 31 P.3d 1101 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
State v. Johnston, 31 P.3d 1101 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 13× “Zimmerman, 166 Or App 635 , 999 P2d 547 (2000); see also ORS 137.520 to ORS 137.630; OAR 213-005-0006.”
State v. Granberry, 316 P.3d 363 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 2× “See generally ORS 137.520 - 137.630; see also State v. Ludwig, 218 Or 483, 492 , 344 P2d 764 (1959) (“Probation is a statutory process * * *.”
State v. Gulley, 921 P.2d 396 (Or. 1996).
“See ORS 137.520 et seq (authorizing sentencing magistrates to impose probation, prescribing certain conditions to be met by probationers, and setting procedure for revocation of probation in appropriate cases).”
State v. Leathers, 531 P.2d 901 (Or. 1975).
“” “ORS 137.520 Power of committing magistrate to parole and arrange for employment of persons confined in county jail.”
FOPPO v. Washington Cnty., 920 P.2d 1141 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
“610(13) defines the duties of parole and probation officers only for purposes of certification and that the focal duties of a parole and probation officer are defined in ORS 137.520 et seq. [3] It follows, according to county, that because case monitors are not performing the…”
State v. Sasser, 799 P.2d 1146 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
“, ORS 137.520(3). 3 Finally, defendant argues that the release agreement *255 was so ambiguous that it could not properly form the basis of a prosecution for second degree escape.”
State v. Lucas, 830 P.2d 601 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
“010(1); ORS 137.520; see Commentary, Oregon Sentencing Guidelines Implementation Manual 93 (1989).”
State v. Lindquist, 86 P.3d 103 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
“005, do not refer to probation or probation violations. For example, although ORS 131.”
State v. Scott, 764 P.2d 976 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).
“4 The trial court authorized defendant’s work release under ORS 137.520, which does not contain a definition of the “work or educational release” that the statute permits.”
State v. Roy, 108 P.3d 88 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
“Conversely, although the criminal statutes in 1989 included extensive provisions regarding the imposition, modification, and revocation of probation, see ORS 137.520 to 137.630 (1989), none of those provisions employed the term “judgment of conviction” to describe orders entered…”
Fed'n of Parole & Prob. Officers v. Washington Cnty., 920 P.2d 1141 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
“610(13) defines the duties of parole and probation officers only for purposes of certification and that the focal duties of a parole and probation officer are defined in ORS 137.520 et seq. 3 It *259 follows, according to county, that because case monitors are not performing the…”
State ex rel. Kessler v. Pearce, 682 P.2d 799 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 2× “In fact, however, Kessler was released from confinement on April 29, 1983, apparently pursuant to ORS 137.520(3). 5 On appeal, the sheriff argues that there is no common law or statutory right, authority or obligation to give credit for time served against a term of confinement…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.520(2) — 2 cases
State v. Johnston, 31 P.3d 1101 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
“Zimmerman, 166 Or App 635 , 999 P2d 547 (2000); see also ORS 137.520 to ORS 137.630; OAR 213-005-0006.”
State v. Granberry, 316 P.3d 363 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“See generally ORS 137.520 - 137.630; see also State v. Ludwig, 218 Or 483, 492 , 344 P2d 764 (1959) (“Probation is a statutory process * * *.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.520(3) — 2 cases
State v. Sasser, 799 P.2d 1146 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
“, ORS 137.520(3). 3 Finally, defendant argues that the release agreement *255 was so ambiguous that it could not properly form the basis of a prosecution for second degree escape.”
State ex rel. Kessler v. Pearce, 682 P.2d 799 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“In fact, however, Kessler was released from confinement on April 29, 1983, apparently pursuant to ORS 137.520(3). 5 On appeal, the sheriff argues that there is no common law or statutory right, authority or obligation to give credit for time served against a term of confinement…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.520(4) — 1 case
State v. Johnston, 31 P.3d 1101 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
“Zimmerman, 166 Or App 635 , 999 P2d 547 (2000); see also ORS 137.520 to ORS 137.630; OAR 213-005-0006.”
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.