Hieu Doan Truong v. Premo

*165Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying his petition for post-conviction relief. We write only to address the assignments of error in petitioner's pro se supplemental brief, in which he argues that the post-conviction court erred when it refused to consider his pro se claims for relief under Church v. Gladden , 244 Or. 308, 417 P.2d 993 (1966), and his request for "suitable counsel" under ORS 138.590.1 We conclude that the court erred as a matter of law, because it based its decision solely on timeliness grounds and, as a result, failed to exercise its discretion regarding petitioner's…