Akers v. Board of Parole

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Akers v. Board of Parole

866 P.2d 527, 126 Or. App. 265, 1994 Ore. App. LEXIS 112

Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided February 2, 1994·No. CA A68021·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM

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 P2d 1312 (1993).

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM

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 P2d 1312 (1993).

Affirmed.

Akers v. Board of Parole, 866 P.2d 527, 126 Or. App. 265, 1994 Ore. App. LEXIS 112 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

866 P.2d 527 (Akers v. Board of Parole) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related