Legal Opinion · Dissent

Jones v. Thompson

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 30, 1998No. 94C-13804; CA A97472Published

1DissentWarren, J.

The majority misunderstands the law that applies to plaintiff* 1 and others who are subject to the parole matrix system. As a result, it asks the wrong questions and gives the wrong answers. When we ask the right questions we find that plaintiffs challenge to the 1994 order is not moot and that we should reverse the judgment and remand the case to the trial court to decide the merits of that challenge.

The foundation for the majority’s conclusion that the case is moot is its understanding that plaintiffs sentence in *234itself justifies his current incarceration and that the actions of the Board…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Spencer v. KemnaSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  2. Garlotte v. FordiceSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  3. Brumnett v. Psychiatric Security Review BoardOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Louis W. Brock v. David B. Weston, Superintendent, Special Commitment CenterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
  5. Walter Washington Young v. Donald T. Vaughn the Attorney General of the State of Pennsylvania the District Attorney for Philadelphia CountyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1996

11 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