Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.785 (2026)

Rules on duration of prison terms when aggravating or mitigating circumstances exist; limitation on terms; dangerous offenders

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

      144.785 Rules on duration of prison terms when aggravating or mitigating circumstances exist; limitation on terms; dangerous offenders. (1) The commission shall propose to the board and the board shall adopt rules regulating variations from the ranges, to be applied when aggravating or mitigating circumstances exist. The rules shall define types of circumstances as aggravating or mitigating and shall set the maximum variation permitted.

      (2) In no event shall the duration of the actual imprisonment under the ranges or variations from the ranges exceed the maximum term of imprisonment fixed for an offense, except in the case of a prisoner who has been sentenced under ORS 161.725 as a dangerous offender, in which case the maximum term shall not exceed 30 years. [1977 c.372 §3; 1981 c.547 §1; 1987 c.634 §3]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1978–2024 · leading case: Severy v. Bd. of Parole, 864 P.2d 368 (Or. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Severy v. Bd. of Parole, 864 P.2d 368 (Or. 1993). · cites it 11× “The Board’s authority for dealing with consecutive sentences, includingthe Board’s authority to “unsum” such sentences, was set out in ORS 144.785(2): ‘ ‘When a prisoner is sentenced to two or more consecutive terms of imprisonment, the duration of the term of imprisonment shall…”
State v. Link, 482 P.3d 28 (Or. 2021). · cites it 2× “The state further represents that, under the matrix system, defendant’s presumptive sentence term could be as low as 120 months or as high as 288 months to life; the board also could depart from the applicable presumptive sentence if it determines that aggravating or mitigating…”
State v. Dinkel, 579 P.2d 245 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 3× “Variations from the range shall be in accordance with ORS 144.785.” ORS 144.120(3) also states that the Board shall consider, in setting the initial release date, "* * * reports, statements and information received * * * from the sentencing judge, the district attorney and the…”
Harris v. Bd. of Parole, 614 P.2d 602 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 4× “Variations from the range shall be in accordance with ORS 144.785. "(3) In setting the initial parole release date for a prisoner pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, the board shall consider reports, statements and information received under ORS 144.”
State v. Cloutier, 596 P.2d 1278 (Or. 1979). · cites it 2× “780(2)(a) and ORS 144.785(1)). Thus, regardless of whether a defendant in a burglary-larceny case may be "convicted and sentenced" for both offenses, or only for burglary, the overall "seriousness" of defendant's conduct, including all "aggravating" circumstances, is to be…”
Norris v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 13 P.3d 104 (Or. 2000). · cites it 5× “780 (1977); ORS 144.785 (1977); Severy v. Board of Parole, 318 Or 172, 176 , 864 P2d 364 (1993).”
Janowski v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 245 P.3d 1270 (Or. 2010). · cites it 2× “Variations from the range shall be in accordance with ORS 144.785. ttsfc ^ ^ ^ “(4) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, in the case of a prisoner whose offense included particularly violent or otherwise dangerous criminal conduct * * *, the board may choose not to…”
State Ex Rel. Engweiler v. Felton, 260 P.3d 448 (Or. 2011). · cites it 2× “Variations from the range shall be in accordance with ORS 144.785. "(3) In setting the initial parole release date for a prisoner pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, the board shall consider the presentence investigation report specified in [ former ] ORS 144.”
Anderson v. Bd. of Parole, 740 P.2d 760 (Or. 1987). · cites it 2× “Variations from the range shall be in accordance with ORS 144.785. "(3) In setting the initial parole release date for a prisoner pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, the board shall consider the presentence investigation report specified in ORS 144.”
Jones v. Thompson, 968 P.2d 380 (Or. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “780(2), subject to adjustment for aggravation or mitigation under ORS 144.785. What the statute calls "ranges of duration" became the parole "matrix" that the Board applied in determining parole release dates for prisoners before the adoption of the sentencing guidelines.”
Hamel v. Johnson, 998 P.2d 661 (Or. 2000). “780 and ORS 144.785, “it is the [Board] that determines the actual duration of imprisonment.”
State Ex Rel. Engweiler v. Cook, 133 P.3d 904 (Or. 2006). “780 and ORS 144.785, ‘it is the [Board] that determines the actual duration of imprisonment.”
Show all 35 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.785(1) — 9 cases
State v. Cloutier, 596 P.2d 1278 (Or. 1979). “780(2)(a) and ORS 144.785(1)). Thus, regardless of whether a defendant in a burglary-larceny case may be "convicted and sentenced" for both offenses, or only for burglary, the overall "seriousness" of defendant's conduct, including all "aggravating" circumstances, is to be…”
Harris v. Bd. of Parole, 614 P.2d 602 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). “Variations from the range shall be in accordance with ORS 144.785. "(3) In setting the initial parole release date for a prisoner pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, the board shall consider reports, statements and information received under ORS 144.”
State v. Dinkel, 579 P.2d 245 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “Variations from the range shall be in accordance with ORS 144.785.” ORS 144.120(3) also states that the Board shall consider, in setting the initial release date, "* * * reports, statements and information received * * * from the sentencing judge, the district attorney and the…”
Hein v. Bd. of Parole, 641 P.2d 642 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
Calderon-Pacheco v. State Bd. of Parole, 788 P.2d 1001 (Or. 1990).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.785(2) — 10 cases
Severy v. Bd. of Parole, 864 P.2d 368 (Or. 1993). “The Board’s authority for dealing with consecutive sentences, includingthe Board’s authority to “unsum” such sentences, was set out in ORS 144.785(2): ‘ ‘When a prisoner is sentenced to two or more consecutive terms of imprisonment, the duration of the term of imprisonment shall…”
Norris v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 13 P.3d 104 (Or. 2000). “780 (1977); ORS 144.785 (1977); Severy v. Board of Parole, 318 Or 172, 176 , 864 P2d 364 (1993).”
State v. Dinkel, 579 P.2d 245 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “Variations from the range shall be in accordance with ORS 144.785.” ORS 144.120(3) also states that the Board shall consider, in setting the initial release date, "* * * reports, statements and information received * * * from the sentencing judge, the district attorney and the…”
Corgain v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 162 P.3d 990 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
Fleming v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 202 P.3d 209 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 144.785(3) — 2 cases
Evensizer v. Bd. of Parole, 723 P.2d 318 (Or. 1986).
State v. Gibson, 583 P.2d 584 (Or. Ct. App. 1978).
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.