Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.101

Board’s jurisdiction over conditions of post-prison supervision; reentry court jurisdiction

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      144.101 Board’s jurisdiction over conditions of post-prison supervision; reentry court jurisdiction. (1) The State Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision has jurisdiction over the imposition of conditions of post-prison supervision and sanctions for violations of those conditions for a person convicted of a felony if:

      (a) The term of imprisonment imposed on the person is more than 12 months;

      (b) The felony is classified as crime category 8, 9, 10 or 11 of the sentencing guidelines grid of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission;

      (c) The person is subject to a sentence under ORS 137.700 or 137.707;

      (d) The person is sentenced as a dangerous offender under ORS 161.725 and 161.737;

      (e) The person is subject to a term of post-prison supervision under ORS 144.103;

      (f) The person is committed to the custody of the Department of Corrections under ORS 137.124;

      (g) The responsibility for correctional services for the person has reverted to the department under ORS 423.483; or

      (h) No local supervisory authority is responsible for correctional services for the person under the laws of this state.

      (2) Except as provided in subsection (1) of this section, a local supervisory authority has jurisdiction over the imposition of conditions of post-prison supervision and sanctions for violations of those conditions for a person sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 12 months or less.

      (3) If a local supervisory authority imposes conditions of post-prison supervision or sanctions for violations of those conditions, the person may request the board to review the conditions or sanctions. The board shall review the request and may, at its discretion, review the conditions and sanctions, under rules adopted by the board.

      (4) If a circuit court in a participating county, as defined in ORS 144.099, enters an order admitting a person into a reentry court under ORS 144.099 (3), the reentry court has concurrent jurisdiction over the imposition of sanctions for violations of the conditions of post-prison supervision.

      (5) Nothing in this section affects the jurisdiction of the board over the imposition of conditions of parole and sanctions for violations of those conditions. [1997 c.525 §3; 1999 c.59 §28; 2006 c.1 §5; 2013 c.649 §§28,34; 2025 c.557 §45]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2024 · leading case: Penn v. Board of Parole
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Penn v. Board of Parole (2019) or “First, the legislature did not expressly describe the board’s authority as a broad grant of discretion, as it did in ORS 144.101(3) (providing that, upon request of person who challenges a local supervisory authority’s impo- sition of conditions of supervision or sanctions for…”
State v. Hunt (2020) orctapp · cites it 2× “Hunt on probation subject to the same or modified conditions, or order sanctions for any violations.”
State v. Richards (2017) or · cites it 2× “ORS 144.101(1). In those circumstances in which the board does not have exclusive authority—for example, if the term of imprisonment is for 12 months or less—the local supervisory authority has jurisdiction over imposition of sanctions for violations of the terms of post-prison…”
Martin v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision (1998) or “” See ORS 144.101(1) (authorizing the Board to impose conditions of post-prison *151 supervision); ORS 144.”
Gaynor v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision (2000) orctapp “102; maintain jurisdiction over imposing post-prison supervision conditions and sanctioning for violations of post-prison supervision conditions, ORS 144.101; and, in conjunction with DOC, adopt rules and procedures for imposing those sanctions.”
State v. Kennedy (2004) orctapp “098 (providing for board review and approval of proposed PPS release plan); ORS 144.101 (providing for board authority to sanction violations of conditions of PPS); ORS 144.”
State v. Richards (2016) orctapp “” The Department of Corrections has no authority to impose sanctions for violations of post-prison supervision. Rather, for most felony cases, the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision supervises and sanctions individuals on post-prison supervision.”
State v. Richards (2017) or · cites it 2× “ORS 144.101(1). In those circumstances in which the board does not have exclusive authority—for example, if the term of imprisonment is for 12 months or less—the local supervi- sory authority has jurisdiction over imposition of sanctions for violations of the terms of…”
State v. Tripp (2024) orctapp “Whether defendant was subject to the “physical custody of * * * [a] supervisory authority” does not depend on whether the sentence was imposed as a standalone sentence or a sentence of probation that included a term of confinement as a condition of probation.”
State v. Stephens (2008) orctapp “See ORS 144.101(l)(d) (board has jurisdiction over persons sentenced as dangerous offenders); ORS 144.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.101(1) — 4 cases
Martin v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision (1998) or “” See ORS 144.101(1) (authorizing the Board to impose conditions of post-prison *151 supervision); ORS 144.”
State v. Richards (2017) or “ORS 144.101(1). In those circumstances in which the board does not have exclusive authority—for example, if the term of imprisonment is for 12 months or less—the local supervisory authority has jurisdiction over imposition of sanctions for violations of the terms of post-prison…”
State v. Richards (2016) orctapp “” The Department of Corrections has no authority to impose sanctions for violations of post-prison supervision. Rather, for most felony cases, the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision supervises and sanctions individuals on post-prison supervision.”
State v. Richards (2017) or “ORS 144.101(1). In those circumstances in which the board does not have exclusive authority—for example, if the term of imprisonment is for 12 months or less—the local supervi- sory authority has jurisdiction over imposition of sanctions for violations of the terms of…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.101(2) — 3 cases
State v. Richards (2017) or “ORS 144.101(1). In those circumstances in which the board does not have exclusive authority—for example, if the term of imprisonment is for 12 months or less—the local supervisory authority has jurisdiction over imposition of sanctions for violations of the terms of post-prison…”
State v. Richards (2017) or “ORS 144.101(1). In those circumstances in which the board does not have exclusive authority—for example, if the term of imprisonment is for 12 months or less—the local supervi- sory authority has jurisdiction over imposition of sanctions for violations of the terms of…”
State v. Tripp (2024) orctapp “Whether defendant was subject to the “physical custody of * * * [a] supervisory authority” does not depend on whether the sentence was imposed as a standalone sentence or a sentence of probation that included a term of confinement as a condition of probation.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.101(3) — 2 cases
Penn v. Board of Parole (2019) or “First, the legislature did not expressly describe the board’s authority as a broad grant of discretion, as it did in ORS 144.101(3) (providing that, upon request of person who challenges a local supervisory authority’s impo- sition of conditions of supervision or sanctions for…”
State v. Hunt (2020) orctapp “Hunt on probation subject to the same or modified conditions, or order sanctions for any violations.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.101(l)(d) — 1 case
State v. Stephens (2008) orctapp “See ORS 144.101(l)(d) (board has jurisdiction over persons sentenced as dangerous offenders); ORS 144.”
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.