Troiano v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Troiano v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

925 P.2d 167, 144 Or. App. 325, 1996 Ore. App. LEXIS 1629

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedOctober 30, 1996

DocketCA A89569

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 925 P.2d 167 (Troiano v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision) 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.

Bluebook

Troiano v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 925 P.2d 167, 144 Or. App. 325, 1996 Ore. App. LEXIS 1629 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

*326 PER CURIAM

Petitioner seeks judicial review of an order of the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision (Board) denying his re-release onto parole. ORS 144.335 (1993); ORS 183.482. We address only the first assignment of error.

Petitioner contends that the Board erred in imposing 25 months of parole, instead of six months as prescribed by the post-prison supervision violation sanctions. He contends that the Board followed OAR 255-75-096, which, he asserts, contravenes ORS 144.346(2). 1 However, petitioner never raised that issue below. To the Board, petitioner argued that if it had applied former OAR 255-75-090(2), his sentence would have been eight to twelve months.

Petitioner failed to preserve his claim of error. See Woolstrum v. Board of Parole, 141 Or App 332, 336, 918 P2d 112 (1996).

Affirmed.

1

ORS 144.346(2) provides:

“To the extent permissible under law, the parole revocation sanctions established under this section shall be consistent with the post-prison supervision violation sanctions set by rules of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission.”

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