Legal Opinion

Sopher v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided January 6, 2010No. A128108PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHaselton, P. J.

Petitioner challenges the validity of several provisions of the so-called “juvenile aggravated murder” rules (the JAM rules), OAR 255-032-0005, OAR 255-032-0010, OAR 255-032-0011, OAR 255-032-0015, OAR 255-032-0020, and Exhibits P-I, P-II, and P-III (all promulgated or amended May 18,1999). See ORS 183.400(4) (providing that this court shall declare a rule invalid if it violates constitutional provisions or exceeds the agency’s statutory authority). Those rules were promulgated by respondent Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision (the board) to establish the murder review hearing date…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Engweiler v. CookOregon Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Beaver Creek Cooperative Telephone Co. v. Public Utility CommissionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  3. State Ex Rel. Engweiler v. PowersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
  4. Sopher v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Engweiler v. FeltonOregon Supreme Court · 2011
  2. State Ex Rel. Engweiler v. FeltonOregon Supreme Court · 2011

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

Powered by the Exa API