Legal Opinion

Gage v. Maass

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided July 26, 1988No. TC 86-C-12030; CA A43049; SC S34329PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLent, J.

The immediate issue is whether habeas corpus is the proper means for an imprisoned felon to enforce his right to receive credit for time served in jail prior to his transfer from custody of the sheriff to custody of the Corrections Division pursuant to sentence where the felon has failed to show whether or not the sheriff has certified the time served. We hold that it is not the proper means.

The record also presents questions about proper procedure in habeas corpus proceedings in the two kinds of cases described in Penrod/Brown v. Cupp, 283 Or 21, 28, 581 P2d 934 (1978):

“In summary, we…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Penrod v. CuppOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Quinn v. HanksOregon Supreme Court · 1951
  3. In Re Davenport for a Writ of Habeas CorpusOregon Supreme Court · 1925
  4. State Ex Rel. Sorensen v. BairdOregon Supreme Court · 1954

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Bedell v. SchiedlerOregon Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Meadows v. SchiedlerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  3. Haskins v. PalmateerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
  4. Keenan v. PetersonOregon Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Lane v. MaassOregon Supreme Court · 1990

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API