423.075
Director; appointment; duties; rules.
(1) The Department of Corrections shall be under the supervision and control of
a director who is responsible for providing for programs for the delivery to
the public of the services assigned to the department, and for undertaking
long-range planning necessary for the effective and efficient delivery of these
services.
(2) The Governor
shall appoint the director for a term of four years, but the director may be
removed at any time during such term at the pleasure of the Governor. The
appointment of the director is subject to confirmation by the Senate in the
manner provided in ORS 171.562 and 171.565.
(3) The director
shall receive such salary as may be provided by law or, if not so provided, as
may be fixed by the Governor, and shall be reimbursed for all expenses actually
and necessarily incurred by the director in the performance of official duties.
(4) The director
may appoint a deputy director, whose appointment is subject to approval by the
Governor and who shall serve at the pleasure of the director. The deputy
director shall have full authority to act for the director, subject to
directions of the director. The appointment of the deputy director shall be by
written order, filed with the Secretary of State.
(5) The Director
of the Department of Corrections shall:
(a) For purposes
of administration and control, and with the approval of the Governor, organize
and reorganize the department in whatever manner the director deems necessary
to conduct the work of the department.
(b) Appoint all
subordinate superintendents, officers and employees, whether classified or
unclassified, of the department, prescribe their duties and fix their
compensation, subject to applicable provisions of the State Personnel Relations
Law.
(c) Delegate to
departmental employees such responsibilities and authority as the director
determines to be necessary.
(d) Provide for
the safety of all prisoners in the custody of the department and may adopt
rules for the government and administration of the department. [1987 c.320 §§2,3]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
15
cases (
7 in the last 5 years), 1990–2025 · leading case:
Clark v. Schumacher, 795 P.2d 1093 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
Clark v. Schumacher, 795 P.2d 1093 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 6× “075(5)(d) allows the director of the Department of Corrections to "adopt rules for the government and administration of the department.”
Smith v. Dep't of Corr., 369 P.3d 1213 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 5× “360(l)(f), the provisions of OAR 291-124-0016 relating to the appointment of an institution’s chief medical officer are authorized by ORS 423.075. 1 That statute provides, in pertinent part: “(1) The Department of Corrections shall be under the supervision and control of a…”
AFSCME Local 2623 v. Dep't of Corr., 843 P.2d 409 (Or. 1992).
· cites it 2× “” ORS 423.075 provides: “(5) The Director of the Department of Corrections shall: ijc Jjí í]í íjí “(c) Delegate to departmental employees such responsibilities and authority as the director determines to be necessary.”
Barrett v. Dep't of Corr., 125 P.3d 98 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
“In Clark , we upheld a rule allowing imposition of fines for misconduct, rejecting an argument that no statutory authority existed for such a rule: “ORS 423.075(5)(d) allows the director of the Department of Corrections to ‘adopt rules for the government and administration of…”
Smith v. Dep't of Corr., 445 P.3d 329 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 6× “In addition, the director may "adopt rules for the government and administration of the department," including those related to chaplains.”
AFSCME Local 2623 v. Dep't of Corr., 820 P.2d 892 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 2× “They contend that, under Article I, section 9, and applicable case law, administrative searches cannot be based on a general grant of authority.”
Just. Resource Ctr. v. Dept. of Corr., 338 Or. App. 643 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“030, and ORS 423.075. See OAR 291-105- 0005(1). Those statutes refer, respectively, to the general powers and duties of the Department of Corrections, including the authority to adopt rules for the guidance of the agency.”
Hessel v. Dep't of Corr., 380 P.3d 1048 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “” 7 ORS 423.075(5)(d) provides that the department shall “[p]rovide for the safety of all prisoners in the custody of the department and may adopt rules for the government and administration of the department.”
Mendoza v. Bell (D. Or. 2021).
· cites it 2× “9-10 (citing Or. Rev. Stat. § 423.075 (5)(d)), and she admitted that she had knowledge of both formal and informal complaints from inmates that officers took too long to provide showers to inmates who had been directly exposed to chemical agents, Meggitt Decl.”
Werby v. Legore (D. Or. 2021).
· cites it 2× “40 (citing Or. Rev. Stat. § 423.075 (5)(d)), and she admitted that she had knowledge of both formal and informal complaints from inmates that officers took too long to provide showers to inmates who had been directly exposed to chemical agents, Haile Decl.”
Konecny v. Vaafusuaga (D. Or. 2021).
· cites it 2× “25 (citing Or. Rev. Stat. § 423.075 (5)(d)), and she admitted that she had knowledge of both formal and informal complaints from inmates that officers took too long to provide showers to inmates who had been directly exposed to chemical agents, Bruggemeier Decl.”
Konecny v. Brown (D. Or. 2021).
· cites it 2× “24 (citing Or. Rev. Stat. § 423.075 (5)(d)), and she admitted that she had knowledge of both formal and informal complaints from inmates that officers took too long to provide showers to inmates who had been directly exposed to chemical agents, Bruggemeier Decl.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 423.075(5) — 1 case
AFSCME Local 2623 v. Dep't of Corr., 820 P.2d 892 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
“They contend that, under Article I, section 9, and applicable case law, administrative searches cannot be based on a general grant of authority.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 423.075(5)(b) — 1 case
Smith v. Dep't of Corr., 445 P.3d 329 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
“In addition, the director may "adopt rules for the government and administration of the department," including those related to chaplains.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 423.075(5)(d) — 8 cases
AFSCME Local 2623 v. Dep't of Corr., 843 P.2d 409 (Or. 1992).
“” ORS 423.075 provides: “(5) The Director of the Department of Corrections shall: ijc Jjí í]í íjí “(c) Delegate to departmental employees such responsibilities and authority as the director determines to be necessary.”
Clark v. Schumacher, 795 P.2d 1093 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
“075(5)(d) allows the director of the Department of Corrections to "adopt rules for the government and administration of the department.”
Barrett v. Dep't of Corr., 125 P.3d 98 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
“In Clark , we upheld a rule allowing imposition of fines for misconduct, rejecting an argument that no statutory authority existed for such a rule: “ORS 423.075(5)(d) allows the director of the Department of Corrections to ‘adopt rules for the government and administration of…”
Hessel v. Dep't of Corr., 380 P.3d 1048 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“” 7 ORS 423.075(5)(d) provides that the department shall “[p]rovide for the safety of all prisoners in the custody of the department and may adopt rules for the government and administration of the department.”
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.