Long v. Board of Parole

563 P.3d 370, 373 Or. 210

• Court: Oregon Supreme Court
• Decided: January 16, 2025
• Docket: S070436
• Status: Published

Opinion

210 January 16, 2025 No. 3

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

BRANDON LONG, Petitioner on Review, v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION, Respondent on Review. (CA A178326) (SC S070436) En Banc On review from the Court of Appeals.* Argued and submitted March 14, 2024. Kyle Krohn, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, Salem, argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent on review. Also on the brief was Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender. Jeff J. Payne, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause and filed the briefs for petitioner on review. Also on the briefs were Ellen Rosenblum, Attorney General, and Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General. PER CURIAM The decision of the Court of Appeals and the final order of the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision are affirmed.

______________ * On judicial review from the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision, 327 Or App 196, 532 P3d 1264 (2023). Cite as 373 Or 210 (2025) 211

PER CURIAM This case involves a challenge to the calculation of petitioner’s post-prison supervision. We accepted review in this case at the same time that we accepted review in Kragt v. Board of Parole, ___ Or ___, ___ P3d ___ (Jan 16, 2025), which we also decided today. According to petitioner, “[t]he question presented in this case is identical to the second question presented in Kragt.” We agree with that assess- ment of the argument. In Kragt, we affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals, rejecting the same argument that petitioner raises in this case. Accordingly, our resolution here is fully controlled by Kragt. The decision of the Court of Appeals and the final order of the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision are affirmed.