Legal Opinion

Newcomb v. Thompson

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 15, 2001No. 96C-13744; A100622PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

Plaintiff appeals from the dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, asserting that the trial court erred in granting defendant’s motion to dismiss based on its finding that the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision properly concluded that plaintiff suffered from a present severe emotional disturbance such as to constitute a danger to the health or safety of the community, and thus properly deferred plaintiffs parole release date. Plaintiff asserts that the psychological evaluation on which the Board relied did not provide sufficient evidence to support the Board’s…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Weidner v. ArmenakisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  2. Merrill v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  3. Christenson v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Hess v. BD. OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISIONCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  2. Brown v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  3. Birch v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
  4. Charlemagne v. Board of ParoleCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2026
  5. Cooley v. BartlettCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006

1 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