Legal Opinion

Norris v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided October 26, 2000No. CA A85542; SC S45047PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRiggs, J.

The issue in this case is whether, under the law in effect in 1978, the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision (Board) had the authority to sustain petitioner’s minimum terms of confinement after an affirmative finding that petitioner was likely to be rehabilitated within a reasonable period of time. The Court of Appeals reversed the Board’s decision to sustain the minimum terms and remanded for further proceedings. Norris v. Board of Parole, 152 Or App 57, 67, 952 P2d 1037 (1998). For reásons different from the Court of Appeals’, we affirm the decision of that court and remand the case…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Palmer v. State of OregonOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Lane County v. Land Conservation & Development CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Severy v. Board of ParoleOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Quintero v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionOregon Supreme Court · 1999

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Janowski v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionOregon Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Severy v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionOregon Supreme Court · 2010
  3. Fleming v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
  4. Roy v. PalmateerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
  5. Roy v. PalmateerOregon Supreme Court · 2005

12 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