Opinion
10-679F; CA A42987
From Oregon Supreme Court December 16, 1987,
Affirmed February 24, 1988 reconsideration denied May 6, petition for review June 7, 1988
Judicial Review from Corrections Division.
Steven H. Gorham, Salem, filed the brief for petitioner.
Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Scott McAlister, Assistant Attorney General, and David L. Kramer, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Warren and Rossman, Judges.
PER CURIAM
Affirmed.
The Supreme Court remanded this case for reconsideration in light of its decision in State v. Lyon, 304 Or. 221, 744 P.2d 231 (1987), holding that polygraph evidence is not admissible in any proceeding subject to the Oregon Evidence Code. The record shows that the hearings officer in this prison disciplinary proceeding, which is not subject to the code, may have relied on petitioner's voluntarily taken polygraph examination in determining that he lied when he testified that he had acted in self-defense when he grabbed another inmate, pushed him against a cell wall and hit his head against the wall and a coat hook several times. We adhere to our reasoning in Wiggett v. OSP, 85 Or. App. 635, 738 P.2d 580, rev den 304 Or. 186 (1987), that the polygraph test results are admissible in disciplinary proceedings as some evidence of credibility. See also Branton v. OSP, 89 Or. App. 597, 750 P.2d 183 (1988).
Affirmed.