Legal Opinion

Keenan v. Peterson

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided January 18, 1989No. TC 87-C-11214; CA A46668; SC S35733PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Per curiam

Petitioner in this habeas corpus case is incarcerated in the Oregon State Correctional Institute (OSCI). He seeks review of a decision of the Court of Appeals holding that his right to confidential communication with his attorney is not interfered with by the practice at OSCI of randomly monitoring telephone calls to assure that such calls are not being used for an illegal purpose. Keenan v. Peterson, 92 Or App 703, 759 P2d 1140 (1988). (The practice, according to the evidence as apparently accepted in the findings of the trial court, is to discontinue immediately any monitoring of a call…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Penrod v. CuppOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Gage v. MaassOregon Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Keenan v. PetersonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1988

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. George W. Nulph v. Dave Cook, Director of the Department of Corrections Hardy Myers, Attorney General of the State of OregonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  2. Bedell v. SchiedlerOregon Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Billings v. GatesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  4. Barrett v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  5. Lane v. MaassOregon Supreme Court · 1990

10 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