Clemman v. Wright
This text of 819 P.2d 327 (Clemman v. Wright) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Plaintiff appeals from the dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus in which he alleges that his confinement at Eastern Oregon Correctional Institution is illegal, because no sex offender treatment program is available at that institution. Respondent moves to dismiss the appeal as moot, because plaintiff has now been transferred to Oregon State Correctional Institution, where sex offender treatment programs are available. Plaintiff asserts that he has not been permitted to enter a treatment program since the transfer. Plaintiff alleges that denial of treatment is cruel and unusual punishment and a violation of his right to equal protection under the Oregon and United States Constitutions, because the Board of Parole will continue to deny him a reduction in the time he must serve until he obtains treatment.
The availability of relief under a writ of habeas corpus is not defeated by a transfer of custody from one correctional facility to another while an appeal is pending. To hold otherwise would thwart the jurisdiction of the appellate court. Anderson v. Britton, 212 Or 1, 5, 318 P2d 291 (1957).1
Motion to dismiss denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
819 P.2d 327, 109 Or. App. 325, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 1586, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clemman-v-wright-orctapp-1991.