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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 421.180 (2026)

Disciplinary procedures; rules

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

      421.180 Disciplinary procedures; rules. The Department of Corrections by rule shall adopt procedures to be utilized in disciplining persons committed to the physical and legal custody of the department. [1973 c.621 §4; 1983 c.211 §1; 1987 c.320 §177]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1974–2025 · leading case: Smith v. Two Rivers Corr. Inst., 312 P.3d 568 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Smith v. Two Rivers Corr. Inst., 312 P.3d 568 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 7× ““(C) Disciplinary procedures adopted pursuant to ORS 421.180.” ORS 183.310(9). Accordingly, we may review certain directives and the like, but we may review a rule of conduct for people in ODOC custody only if violation of the rule of conduct may result in the disciplinary…”
State v. Gaines, 206 P.3d 1042 (Or. 2009). “105 (prison superintendents may impose “appropriate punishment” for disobedience with prison rules); ORS 421.180 (Department of Corrections to adopt disciplinary procedures for persons committed to its physical and legal custody).”
Sterling v. Cupp, 625 P.2d 123 (Or. 1981). · cites it 2× “[25] Prisoner disciplinary procedures are further subject to approval of the governor, ORS 421.180, and cf. the interstate compacts cited supra.”
Curtis v. Oregon State Corr. Inst., 532 P.2d 798 (Or. Ct. App. 1975). · cites it 9× “” ORS 421.180. *534 Thus, we glean from the above provisions that the superintendent has authority under ORS 421.”
Rutherford v. Oregon State Penitentiary, Etc., 592 P.2d 1028 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 6× “” But in other situations in which prisoners were claiming APA rights, there was not an express statute to defeat their claims.”
Bonney v. Oregon State Penitentiary, Cor. Div., 519 P.2d 383 (Or. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 3× “” I Petitioner’s statutory contention is that Rules IY (2) and IV (4) do not comply with the requirements of ORS 421.180 to 421.190: “The division shall adopt procedures to be utilized in disciplining persons committed to the physical and legal custody of the division.”
State Ex Rel. Osborne v. Cook, 59 P.3d 531 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “194 provides: “(1) Disciplinary orders of the Department of Corrections issued under procedures adopted pursuant to ORS 421.180 are not subject to judicial review by any court of ' this state.”
Bartholomew v. Reed, 477 F. Supp. 223 (D. Or. 1979). “183; ORS 421.180 et seq. However, under these statutes, ORS 183.”
Bekins v. Cupp, 545 P.2d 861 (Or. 1976). “He contends he was entitled to notice of why he was being accorded special treatment, a hearing, an opportunity to present a defense, and a written statement by the factfinder of the evidence relied upon and the reasons for the action.”
Alexander v. Oregon State Penitentiary, 783 P.2d 1034 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 4× “ORS 421.180 provides: “The Department of Corrections by rule shall adopt procedures to be utilized in disciplining persons committed to the physical and legal custody of the department.”
Hale v. Oregon State Penitentiary, Etc., 577 P.2d 531 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 2× “ORS 421.180 authorizes the Corrections Division to adopt rules of procedure to be utilized in disciplining inmates in penal institutions under its control.”
Evans v. Oregon State Penitentiary, 743 P.2d 168 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). “195, nor any other statute about prison discipline (see ORS 421.180 through ORS 421.195), contains any standards for the agency or this court to use in determining under what circumstances a prison discipline order should be stayed.”
Show all 33 citing cases →
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.