Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Ralston v. Oregon State Correctional Institution

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 17, 1988No. 5-540F; CA A45702Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partGraber, J.

I agree with the majority that petitioner’s claim of insufficient evidence to sustain a finding that he attempted to possess unauthorized vitamins has no merit. Therefore, I concur in that much of the opinion. However, I disagree with the affirmance of the order imposing disciplinary sanctions for attempting to possess marijuana.

Petitioner’s assignment of error is that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a finding that he violated the applicable rule. His brief sets forth all the relative evidence verbatim, and the state agrees with him about what the record shows. The provisions of the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. HickmannOregon Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Gervin v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1963
  3. State of Oregon v. MooreOregon Supreme Court · 1952
  4. State v. WilsonOregon Supreme Court · 1959
  5. State v. MillerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1969

3 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