Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.331 (2026)

Suspension of parole or post-prison supervision; custody of violator; revocation hearing before suspension

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

      144.331 Suspension of parole or post-prison supervision; custody of violator; revocation hearing before suspension. (1) The State Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision may suspend the parole or post-prison supervision of any person under its jurisdiction upon being informed and having reasonable grounds to believe that the person has violated the conditions of parole or post-prison supervision and may order the arrest and detention of such person. The written order of the board is sufficient warrant for any law enforcement officer to take into custody such person. A sheriff, municipal police officer, constable, parole and probation officer, prison official or other peace officer shall execute the order.

      (2) The board or its designated representative may proceed to hearing as provided in ORS 144.343 without first suspending the parole or post-prison supervision or ordering the arrest and detention of any person under its jurisdiction upon being informed and having reasonable grounds to believe that the person under its jurisdiction has violated a condition of parole and that revocation of parole may be warranted or that the person under its jurisdiction has violated a condition of post-prison supervision and that incarceration for the violation may be warranted.

      (3) During the pendency of any post-prison supervision violation proceedings, the period of post-prison supervision is stayed and the board has jurisdiction over the offender until the proceedings are resolved. [1973 c.694 §9 (enacted in lieu of 144.330); 1977 c.375 §1; 1991 c.108 §1; 2005 c.264 §13]

 

      144.333 [Repealed by 1974 c.36 §28]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1978–2015 · leading case: McAlpine v. Multnomah Cnty., 883 P.2d 869 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
McAlpine v. Multnomah Cnty., 883 P.2d 869 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 17× “] “At all material times there was in effect ORS 144.331, which stated that a sheriff, municipal police officer or other peace officer shall execute the order of arrest for any person which is issued by the Oregon Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision.”
Do Mun Kim v. Multnomah Cnty., 909 P.2d 886 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 3× “” In McAlpine, we concluded that ORS 144.331(1), a statute granting similar authority to parole officers, ‘ ‘was not intended to protect members of the general public from criminal activities perpetrated by parole violators.”
State v. McClure, 300 P.3d 210 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 6× “It implicitly recognizes the authority granted to the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision and peace officers and parole and probation officers in ORS 144.331. ORS 144.331 grants the board authority to suspend parole or post-prison supervision (PPS) “of any person under…”
Roof v. Bd. of Parole, 736 P.2d 193 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). “See ORS 144.331; ORS 144.343; former OAR 255-75-090.”
Waller v. Drago, 611 F. Supp. 405 (D. Or. 1985). · cites it 2× “8090 (1982), citing ORS 144.331, 423.020(1). The Attorney General has also stated that county officials have no authority to release an alleged parole violator without the Board’s approval or a court order, and that County officials who illegally release a parolee can be…”
Beveridge v. Johnson, 967 P.2d 1238 (Or. Ct. App. 1998). “The board had no authority to arrest and detain plaintiff: The Suspend and Detain Warrants, under which plaintiff was arrested, authorize arrest when a parolee has allegedly violated parole, ORS 144.331; ORS 144.340, and there is no allegation here that plaintiff had done so.”
State v. Patterson, 346 P.3d 614 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “The order cites both ORS 144.331 and ORS 144.340. ORS 144.340 addresses the authority of the Department of Corrections to take custody of persons “whenever they have violated” the terms of PPS.”
Erickson v. Oregon State Bd. of Parole, 578 P.2d 499 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “ORS 144.331(1). 1 Charges against petitioner in Washington were dismissed sometime prior to July 15, 1977.”
Wilcox v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 107 P.3d 637 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “ORS 144.331 (1987). The earlier statutory scheme, without mandatory exhaustion, presented petitioners a choice between administrative review and judicial review.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.331(1) — 6 cases
McAlpine v. Multnomah Cnty., 883 P.2d 869 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). “] “At all material times there was in effect ORS 144.331, which stated that a sheriff, municipal police officer or other peace officer shall execute the order of arrest for any person which is issued by the Oregon Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision.”
Do Mun Kim v. Multnomah Cnty., 909 P.2d 886 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). “” In McAlpine, we concluded that ORS 144.331(1), a statute granting similar authority to parole officers, ‘ ‘was not intended to protect members of the general public from criminal activities perpetrated by parole violators.”
Waller v. Drago, 611 F. Supp. 405 (D. Or. 1985). “8090 (1982), citing ORS 144.331, 423.020(1). The Attorney General has also stated that county officials have no authority to release an alleged parole violator without the Board’s approval or a court order, and that County officials who illegally release a parolee can be…”
State v. McClure, 300 P.3d 210 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “It implicitly recognizes the authority granted to the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision and peace officers and parole and probation officers in ORS 144.331. ORS 144.331 grants the board authority to suspend parole or post-prison supervision (PPS) “of any person under…”
State v. Patterson, 346 P.3d 614 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “The order cites both ORS 144.331 and ORS 144.340. ORS 144.340 addresses the authority of the Department of Corrections to take custody of persons “whenever they have violated” the terms of PPS.”
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.