144.280
Hearing after parole denied to prisoner sentenced for crime committed prior to
November 1, 1989; rules.
(1)(a) If the State Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision denies parole
to a prisoner sentenced for a crime committed prior to November 1, 1989, the
board may not grant the prisoner a subsequent hearing that is less than two
years, or more than 10 years, from the date parole is denied, unless the
two-year period would exceed the maximum sentence imposed by the court.
(b) The board may
not grant the prisoner a hearing that is more than two years from the date
parole is denied unless the board finds that it is not reasonable to expect
that the prisoner would be granted parole before the date of the subsequent
hearing.
(c) The board
shall determine the date of the subsequent hearing pursuant to rules adopted by
the board. Rules adopted under this paragraph must be based on the foundation
principles of criminal law described in section 15, Article I of the Oregon
Constitution.
(2) If the board
grants a prisoner a hearing that is more than two years from the date parole is
denied, the prisoner may submit a request for an interim hearing not earlier
than the date that is two years from the date parole is denied and at intervals
of not less than two years thereafter. If the board finds, based upon a request
for an interim hearing, that there is reasonable cause to believe that the
prisoner may be granted parole, the board shall conduct a hearing as soon as is
reasonably convenient.
(3) When the
board grants a prisoner a hearing that is more than two years from the date
parole is denied and when the board denies a petition for an interim hearing,
the board shall issue a final order. The order shall be accompanied by findings
of fact and conclusions of law. The findings of fact shall consist of a concise
statement of the underlying facts supporting the findings as to each contested
issue of fact and as to each ultimate fact required to support the board’s
order. Unless the prisoner bears the burden of persuasion, the order shall
include findings necessary to deny the prisoner parole for any period of time
when the prisoner would be presumed to be eligible for parole. [2009 c.660 §2]
Note: 144.280 and 144.285 were enacted
into law by the Legislative Assembly but were not added to or made a part of
ORS chapter 144 or any series therein by legislative action. See Preface to
Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation.
Notes of Decisions
Mendacino v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 404 P.3d 1048 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 14× “125(3)(a), and that it was “not reasonable to expect that [petitioner] would be granted parole” before 2023, the new date set by the board, ORS 144.280 (l)(b). Petitioner raises two assignments of error.”
Contreras v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 443 P.3d 636 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 17× “" 2 That provision also provides that "[t]he board shall determine the scheduled release date, and the prisoner may petition for interim review, in accordance with ORS 144.280." Under ORS 144.280, "[t]he board may not grant the prisoner a hearing that is more than *471 two years…”
Smith v. Bd. of Parole, 472 P.3d 805 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“Board of Parole, 365 Or 607, 623-24 , 451 P3d 589 (2019); see ORS 144.280(1)(b) (“The board may not grant the prisoner a hearing that is more than two years from the date parole is denied unless the board finds that it is not reasonable to expect that the prisoner would be…”
Gutierrez v. Bd. of Parole, 506 P.3d 1129 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 6× “In coming to that conclusion, an understanding of the procedure pursuant to ORS 144.280 is necessary. When, as here, “the board grants a prisoner a hear- ing that is more than two years from the date parole is denied, the prisoner may submit a request for an interim hearing.”
Jenkins v. Bd. of Parole, 309 P.3d 1115 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“The board shall determine the scheduled release date, and the prisoner may petition for interim review, in accordance with ORS 144.280.” Petitioner also asserts that the order is so deficient that it violates his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United…”
Gordon v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 340 P.3d 150 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
“Further, in 2009, the legislature also enacted ORS 144.280, which provides, in part: “[(l)](b) The board may not grant the prisoner a hearing that is more than two years from the date parole is denied unless the board finds that it is not reasonable to expect that the prisoner…”
Charlemagne v. Cain (D. Or. 2023).
“See ORS 144.280(2). Petitioner availed himself of this opportunity in 2013, 2015, and 2017, but the Board refused to conduct an interim hearing in each of those years.”
Meriweather v. Reyes (D. Or. 2024).
“§ 144.280 (2). If petitioner were to prevail on his claim, it would not necessarily lead to his earlier release; it would only require the Board to hold an interim hearing to determine if he "may" be granted parole.”
Halladay v. Bd. of Parole, 471 P.3d 822 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“Petitioner argues that OAR 255-060-0006(1) exceeds the statutory authority of the board under ORS 144.280(1)(a) and (b), and that OAR 255-060-0012(1) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and ex post facto prohibi-…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.280(1)(a) — 2 cases
Contreras v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 443 P.3d 636 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
“" 2 That provision also provides that "[t]he board shall determine the scheduled release date, and the prisoner may petition for interim review, in accordance with ORS 144.280." Under ORS 144.280, "[t]he board may not grant the prisoner a hearing that is more than *471 two years…”
Halladay v. Bd. of Parole, 471 P.3d 822 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“Petitioner argues that OAR 255-060-0006(1) exceeds the statutory authority of the board under ORS 144.280(1)(a) and (b), and that OAR 255-060-0012(1) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and ex post facto prohibi-…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.280(1)(b) — 2 cases
Smith v. Bd. of Parole, 472 P.3d 805 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“Board of Parole, 365 Or 607, 623-24 , 451 P3d 589 (2019); see ORS 144.280(1)(b) (“The board may not grant the prisoner a hearing that is more than two years from the date parole is denied unless the board finds that it is not reasonable to expect that the prisoner would be…”
Contreras v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 443 P.3d 636 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
“" 2 That provision also provides that "[t]he board shall determine the scheduled release date, and the prisoner may petition for interim review, in accordance with ORS 144.280." Under ORS 144.280, "[t]he board may not grant the prisoner a hearing that is more than *471 two years…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.280(1)(c) — 1 case
Contreras v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 443 P.3d 636 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
“" 2 That provision also provides that "[t]he board shall determine the scheduled release date, and the prisoner may petition for interim review, in accordance with ORS 144.280." Under ORS 144.280, "[t]he board may not grant the prisoner a hearing that is more than *471 two years…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.280(2) — 3 cases
Mendacino v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 404 P.3d 1048 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“125(3)(a), and that it was “not reasonable to expect that [petitioner] would be granted parole” before 2023, the new date set by the board, ORS 144.280 (l)(b). Petitioner raises two assignments of error.”
Gutierrez v. Bd. of Parole, 506 P.3d 1129 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“In coming to that conclusion, an understanding of the procedure pursuant to ORS 144.280 is necessary. When, as here, “the board grants a prisoner a hear- ing that is more than two years from the date parole is denied, the prisoner may submit a request for an interim hearing.”
Charlemagne v. Cain (D. Or. 2023).
“See ORS 144.280(2). Petitioner availed himself of this opportunity in 2013, 2015, and 2017, but the Board refused to conduct an interim hearing in each of those years.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.280(3) — 3 cases
Mendacino v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 404 P.3d 1048 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“125(3)(a), and that it was “not reasonable to expect that [petitioner] would be granted parole” before 2023, the new date set by the board, ORS 144.280 (l)(b). Petitioner raises two assignments of error.”
Contreras v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 443 P.3d 636 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
“" 2 That provision also provides that "[t]he board shall determine the scheduled release date, and the prisoner may petition for interim review, in accordance with ORS 144.280." Under ORS 144.280, "[t]he board may not grant the prisoner a hearing that is more than *471 two years…”
Gutierrez v. Bd. of Parole, 506 P.3d 1129 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“In coming to that conclusion, an understanding of the procedure pursuant to ORS 144.280 is necessary. When, as here, “the board grants a prisoner a hear- ing that is more than two years from the date parole is denied, the prisoner may submit a request for an interim hearing.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.280(l)(b) — 1 case
Mendacino v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 404 P.3d 1048 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“125(3)(a), and that it was “not reasonable to expect that [petitioner] would be granted parole” before 2023, the new date set by the board, ORS 144.280 (l)(b). Petitioner raises two assignments of error.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.280(l)(c) — 1 case
Mendacino v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 404 P.3d 1048 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“125(3)(a), and that it was “not reasonable to expect that [petitioner] would be granted parole” before 2023, the new date set by the board, ORS 144.280 (l)(b). Petitioner raises two assignments of error.”
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.