Lopez v. Mills
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtDuncan, J.
Petitioner appeals the post-conviction court’s judgment, which granted him relief, but not the relief he requested. Petitioner argues that, because the state breached its agreement to recommend that he be paroled, the court had to order that he be released on parole or that his conviction be vacated. According to petitioner, the court’s chosen relief — an order that the state make the agreed-upon recommendation at a new parole hearing — was inadequate because it did not give him the benefit of the agreement. For the reasons explained below, we disagree and, therefore, affirm.
The relevant…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Santobello v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Janowski v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionOregon Supreme Court · 2010
- Peek v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
- Rolfe v. Psychiatric Security Review BoardCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
- Stewart v. CuppCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1973
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Maney v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
- Washington v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015