From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Akers v. Board of Parole

Oregon Court of Appeals
Feb 2, 1994
866 P.2d 527 (Or. Ct. App. 1994)

Opinion

CA A68021

Submitted on record and briefs December 23, 1993.

Affirmed February 2, 1994.

Judicial Review from Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision.

Sally L. Avera, Public Defender, and Lawrence J. Hall, Deputy Public Defender, filed the brief for petitioner.

Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, and Harrison Latto, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Edmonds, Judge, and Durham, Judge pro tempore.


PER CURIAM

Affirmed.


Petitioner seeks review of an order of the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision that imposed as a condition of parole that he not have contact with a particular person. He asserts that there is not substantial evidence to support imposition of the condition. We have reviewed the record, including evidence not disclosed to petitioner, and conclude that there is evidence justifying the imposition of the condition. He also challenges the refusal of the Board to disclose to him a letter it considered in imposing the condition. The withholding of the letter was not error. Flowers v. Board of Parole, 124 Or. App. 331, 862 P.2d 1312 (1993).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Akers v. Board of Parole

Oregon Court of Appeals
Feb 2, 1994
866 P.2d 527 (Or. Ct. App. 1994)
Case details for

Akers v. Board of Parole

Case Details

Full title:ERIC MICHAEL AKERS, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON…

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Feb 2, 1994

Citations

866 P.2d 527 (Or. Ct. App. 1994)
866 P.2d 527