Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 421.105

Enforcement of rules; violence and injury to adults in custody prohibited

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

      421.105 Enforcement of rules; violence and injury to adults in custody prohibited. (1) The superintendent may enforce obedience to the rules for the government of the adults in custody in the institution under the supervision of the superintendent by appropriate punishment but neither the superintendent nor any other prison official or employee may strike or inflict physical violence except in self-defense, or inflict any cruel or unusual punishment.

      (2) The person of an adult in custody sentenced to imprisonment in the Department of Corrections institution is under the protection of the law and the adult in custody shall not be injured except as authorized by law. [Amended by 1953 c.476 §5; 1969 c.502 §9; 1987 c.158 §75; 1987 c.320 §165; 2019 c.213 §65]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1965–2025 · leading case: Sterling v. Cupp
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sterling v. Cupp (1981) or · cites it 3× “The "protection of the law" to which ORS 421.105(2) entitles an inmate facing actual or threatened "injury" is timely protection.”
State v. Gaines (2009) or “076(12) (counties to have and provide to inmates written rules for inmate conduct and disciplinary procedures); ORS 421.105 (prison superintendents may impose “appropriate punishment” for disobedience with prison rules); ORS 421.”
Clark v. Schumacher (1990) orctapp · cites it 6× “" ORS 421.105(1). [6] We conclude that the "general policy" of the statutory framework permits the imposition of fines as disciplinary sanctions.”
Capps v. Atiyeh (1983) ord · cites it 2× “” Section 421.105 provides in pertinent part: “(1) The superintendents may enforce obedience to the rules for the government of inmates in the institution under his supervision by appropriate punishment but neither the superintendent nor any other prison official or employee may…”
State v. Rezin (1996) orctapp · cites it 3× “” ORS 421.105. The disciplinary sanctions that OSP imposed on defendant clearly had the punitive purposes of *162 punishing him for violating those rules and of deterring other violations.”
Snow v. Oregon State Penitentiary (1989) or · cites it 2× “040(2), which empowers divisions to `perform all legal and peaceful acts requisite and necessary for the successful management and maintenance of the institutions within its jurisdiction', and ORS 421.105(1) and (2), which provide that the superintendents may enforce obedience…”
Curtis v. Oregon State Correctional Institution (1975) orctapp · cites it 2× “” ORS 421.105(1), which provides: “The superintendent may enforce obedience to the rules for the government of the inmates in the institution under his supervision by appropriate punishment but neither the superintendent nor any other prison official or employe may strike or…”
Barrett v. Department of Corrections (2005) orctapp · cites it 5× “125 contains a statutory limitation on sanctions for rule violations that otherwise would be authorized by ORS 421.105. We therefore address that question.”
Grenfell v. Gladden (1965) or · cites it 2× “ll alleges that on October 6, 1963 in the segregation building in the penitentiary, he was subjected to an unprovoked, unnecessary and brutal beating at the hands of three prison guards, who are named in the petition, that said guards assaulted him by striking him with their…”
Justice Resource Center v. Dept. of Corrections (2025) orctapp · cites it 11× “Although petitioner did refer specifically to those two rules in its opening brief, they were discussed as an argument in support of petitioner’s first assignment of error that DOC’s rules providing for prolonged DSC contravene ORS 421.”
Archuletta v. Oregon Women's Correctional Center (1976) orctapp “1 We conclude that petitioner’s right to remain silent and her claimed right to counsel which she argues necessarily flows therefrom are issues not properly before us since the disciplinary proceeding against petitioner is not based on criminal charges and is essentially civil…”
Palaia v. Oregon State Penitentiary (1977) orctapp · cites it 2× “We see no good reason why the Superintendent of a prison who has the statutory power to enforce obedience to the rules for the government of inmates by appropriate punishment, ORS 421.105 (l), 1 should not have the same authority in this regard as does a court in imposing…”
Show all 17 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 421.105(1) — 8 cases
Clark v. Schumacher (1990) orctapp “" ORS 421.105(1). [6] We conclude that the "general policy" of the statutory framework permits the imposition of fines as disciplinary sanctions.”
Snow v. Oregon State Penitentiary (1989) or “040(2), which empowers divisions to `perform all legal and peaceful acts requisite and necessary for the successful management and maintenance of the institutions within its jurisdiction', and ORS 421.105(1) and (2), which provide that the superintendents may enforce obedience…”
Curtis v. Oregon State Correctional Institution (1975) orctapp “” ORS 421.105(1), which provides: “The superintendent may enforce obedience to the rules for the government of the inmates in the institution under his supervision by appropriate punishment but neither the superintendent nor any other prison official or employe may strike or…”
Barrett v. Department of Corrections (2005) orctapp “125 contains a statutory limitation on sanctions for rule violations that otherwise would be authorized by ORS 421.105. We therefore address that question.”
Smith v. Oregon State Department of Corrections (1990) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 421.105(2) — 2 cases
Sterling v. Cupp (1981) or “The "protection of the law" to which ORS 421.105(2) entitles an inmate facing actual or threatened "injury" is timely protection.”
State v. Cook (2019) orctapp
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.