Sharp v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

Full title: Jeffrey G. SHARP, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON…

Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Date published: Jun 27, 2018

420 P.3d 698 (Or. Ct. App. 2018)

420 P.3d 698

Opinion

A166071

06-27-2018

Jeffrey G. SHARP, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION, Respondent.

Jeffrey G. Sharp filed the briefs pro se. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Keith L. Kutler, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Jeffrey G. Sharp filed the briefs pro se.

Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Keith L. Kutler, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Hadlock, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and Aoyagi, Judge.

PER CURIAMUnder ORS 183.400, petitioner challenges OAR 255-035-0022, a rule adopted by the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision (the board), asserting that the rule is inconsistent with the board's statutory authority. See ORS 183.400(4) (court shall declare a rule invalid only if the rule violates constitutional provision, exceeds the statutory authority of the agency that adopted the rule, or was adopted without compliance with applicable rulemaking procedures). Having reviewed the parties' arguments, we reject petitioner's contentions and conclude that the challenged rule is valid.

OAR 255-035-0022 held valid.