From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Garratt v. Board of Parole

Oregon Court of Appeals
Dec 11, 1996
927 P.2d 1121 (Or. Ct. App. 1996)

Opinion

CA A90817

Argued and submitted July 24, 1996.

Affirmed December 11, 1996.

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

Hari Nam S. Khalsa, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Sally L. Avera, Public Defender.

Mary H. Williams, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.

Before Deits, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Haselton, Judges.


PER CURIAM

Affirmed.


Petitioner seeks review of an order of the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision establishing conditions of parole, including a declaration that petitioner is a predatory sex offender. ORS 181.585 to ORS 181.589.

Most of Petitioner's arguments are resolved contrary to his position by our decisions in Schuch v. Board of Parole, 139 Or. App. 327, 912 P.2d 403, rev den 324 Or. 78 (1996), and Gress v. Board of Parole, 143 Or. App. 7, 924 P.2d 329, on recons 144 Or. App. 375, 927 P.2d 138 (1996). Petitioner also argues that the Board erred in including as a condition of his parole that he not have contact with minor males without prior written approval of his parole officer and that he not have any contact with his ex-wife and her family. Petitioner's argument is without merit and does not require discussion.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Garratt v. Board of Parole

Oregon Court of Appeals
Dec 11, 1996
927 P.2d 1121 (Or. Ct. App. 1996)
Case details for

Garratt v. Board of Parole

Case Details

Full title:STEVEN D. GARRATT, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON…

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Dec 11, 1996

Citations

927 P.2d 1121 (Or. Ct. App. 1996)
927 P.2d 1121