Legal Opinion

Bedell v. Schiedler

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 28, 1988No. 87-C-10928; CA A46980PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

Petitioner, an inmate at Oregon Women’s Correctional Center (OWCC), appeals the dismissal of her petition for a writ of habeas corpus.1 We affirm.

Petitioner contends that her conditions of confinement are unlawful, because OWCC’s failure to provide proper ventilation and air circulation poses serious health problems for her. Petitioner’s replication, see ORS 34.670, sets forth the causes of the alleged improper ventilation and circulation and then alleges:

“The effects of the stale and unclean air on [p]etitioner are substantial. She awakens each morning with clogged sinuses and a severe…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Penrod v. CuppOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Scott v. CuppCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Bedell v. SchiedlerOregon Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Lane v. MaassOregon Supreme Court · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API