144.108
Recommitment to prison for certain violations; procedure; effect of
recommitment. (1)
If the violation of post-prison supervision is new criminal activity or if the
supervisory authority finds that the continuum of sanctions is insufficient
punishment for a violation of the conditions of post-prison supervision, the
supervisory authority may:
(a) Impose the
most restrictive sanction available, including incarceration in jail;
(b) Request the
State Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision to impose a sanction under
subsection (2) of this section; or
(c) Request the
board to impose a sanction under ORS 144.107.
(2) If so
requested, the board or its designated representative shall hold a hearing to
determine whether incarceration in a jail or state correctional facility is
appropriate. Except as otherwise provided by rules of the board and the
Department of Corrections concerning parole and post-prison supervision
violators, the board may impose a sanction up to the maximum provided by rules
of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission. In conducting a hearing pursuant to
this subsection, the board or its designated representative shall follow the
procedures and the offender shall have all the rights described in ORS 144.343
and 144.347 relating to revocation of parole.
(3) A person who
is ordered to serve a term of incarceration in a jail or state correctional
facility as a sanction for a post-prison supervision violation is not eligible
for:
(a) Earned credit
time as described in ORS 169.110 or 421.121;
(b) Transitional
leave as defined in ORS 421.168; or
(c) Temporary
leave as described in ORS 169.115 or 421.165 (1987 Replacement Part).
(4) A person who
is ordered to serve a term of incarceration in a state correctional facility as
a sanction for a post-prison supervision violation shall receive credit for
time served on the post-prison supervision violation prior to the board’s
imposition of the term of incarceration. [1989 c.790 §36; 1995 c.423 §17; 1997
c.313 §13; 1997 c.525 §5; 2009 c.178 §29; 2010 c.89 §12]
Note: See note under 144.096.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases, 1996–2009 · leading case:
Houston v. Brown, 190 P.3d 427 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
Houston v. Brown, 190 P.3d 427 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 42× “The trial court ruled that habeas corpus relief was not available to plaintiff on jurisdictional grounds and, in the alternative, that the limitation of 180 days of incarceration provided for in the administrative rule adopted pursuant to ORS 144.108 applies only to post-prison…”
State Ex Rel. Engweiler v. Cook, 133 P.3d 904 (Or. 2006).
· cites it 3× “6 ORS 144.108(3) provides, in part: “A person who is ordered to serve a term of incarceration in a jail or state correctional facility as a sanction for a post-prison supervision violation is not eligible for: “(a) earned credit time as described in ORS 169.”
O'HARA v. Bd. of Parole, 203 P.3d 213 (Or. 2009).
“See ORS 144.108(2) (requiring hearing that complies with ORS 144.”
State v. Rezin, 911 P.2d 1264 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 2× “106; ORS 144.108. If a violation of the conditions *164 of post-prision supervision involves new criminal activity, the result may be to return the person to a correctional facility.”
Rund v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 953 P.2d 766 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 8× “3 It is not clear whether the previous two incarceration periods, totaling 150 days, were imposed pursuant to ORS 144.108 or to ORS 144.106. 4 Petitioner contends that the Board acted outside its authority when it required him, as a condition of his PPS, to participate in a…”
State Ex Rel. Engweiler v. Cook, 103 P.3d 1205 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 2× “See ORS 144.108(3), (4). Board-imposed terms of incarceration are expressly exempted from the earned time credit provisions, ORS 144.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.108(1) — 2 cases
Houston v. Brown, 190 P.3d 427 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“The trial court ruled that habeas corpus relief was not available to plaintiff on jurisdictional grounds and, in the alternative, that the limitation of 180 days of incarceration provided for in the administrative rule adopted pursuant to ORS 144.108 applies only to post-prison…”
State v. Rezin, 911 P.2d 1264 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
“106; ORS 144.108. If a violation of the conditions *164 of post-prision supervision involves new criminal activity, the result may be to return the person to a correctional facility.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.108(2) — 2 cases
Houston v. Brown, 190 P.3d 427 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“The trial court ruled that habeas corpus relief was not available to plaintiff on jurisdictional grounds and, in the alternative, that the limitation of 180 days of incarceration provided for in the administrative rule adopted pursuant to ORS 144.108 applies only to post-prison…”
O'HARA v. Bd. of Parole, 203 P.3d 213 (Or. 2009).
“See ORS 144.108(2) (requiring hearing that complies with ORS 144.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.108(3) — 2 cases
State Ex Rel. Engweiler v. Cook, 133 P.3d 904 (Or. 2006).
“6 ORS 144.108(3) provides, in part: “A person who is ordered to serve a term of incarceration in a jail or state correctional facility as a sanction for a post-prison supervision violation is not eligible for: “(a) earned credit time as described in ORS 169.”
State Ex Rel. Engweiler v. Cook, 103 P.3d 1205 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
“See ORS 144.108(3), (4). Board-imposed terms of incarceration are expressly exempted from the earned time credit provisions, ORS 144.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.108(3)(a) — 2 cases
State Ex Rel. Engweiler v. Cook, 133 P.3d 904 (Or. 2006).
“6 ORS 144.108(3) provides, in part: “A person who is ordered to serve a term of incarceration in a jail or state correctional facility as a sanction for a post-prison supervision violation is not eligible for: “(a) earned credit time as described in ORS 169.”
State Ex Rel. Engweiler v. Cook, 103 P.3d 1205 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
“See ORS 144.108(3), (4). Board-imposed terms of incarceration are expressly exempted from the earned time credit provisions, 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.