Legal Opinion

Dingman v. Board of Parole

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 5, 1992No. CA A66733PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

Petitioner seeks judicial review of an order of the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision establishing conditions for his parole. Because petitioner has exhausted his administrative remedies, we have jurisdiction to review the order. Owens v. Board of Parole, 113 Or App 507, 510, 834 P2d 547 (1992).

Petitioner challenges the condition barring him from entering or residing in Polk or Yamhill counties during the period of parole supervision. We conclude that the Board erred in imposing that condition.

Although we assume that the Board’s purpose was the protection of the public, the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Owens v. Board of ParoleCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  2. State v. FerreCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Martin v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionOregon Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Martin v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
  3. Martin v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API