Williams v. Palmateer

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Williams v. Palmateer

60 P.3d 1156, 185 Or. App. 708, 2003 Ore. App. LEXIS 41

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedJanuary 8, 2003

Docket00C-19454; A112723

StatusPublished

This text of 60 P.3d 1156 (Williams v. Palmateer) 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

Williams v. Palmateer, 60 P.3d 1156, 185 Or. App. 708, 2003 Ore. App. LEXIS 41 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Plaintiff and the state have filed a joint motion for an order reversing the judgment entered against plaintiff in this habeas corpus case. We grant the motion. In 1986, plaintiff was convicted of multiple felonies and received an 80-year sentence with a 12-year minimum. In May 2000, the Board of Parole and Post-Prision Supervision deferred his release until November 2002 on the ground that he has a “severe emotional disturbance” that “constitutes a danger to the health or safety of the community.” Plaintiff filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that the board lacked authority to extend his release date because there was “no evidence in the record to support the Board’s finding of a ‘present severe emotional disturbance.’ ” The trial court, pursuant to ORS 34.370(6), dismissed the petition, ruling that there were no facts alleged that would entitle plaintiff to habeas corpus relief.

ORS 34.670(6) permits a court to dismiss a habeas petition if it is “meritless.” A meritless petition is one that, “when liberally construed, fails to state a claim upon which habeas corpus relief may be granted.” ORS 34.370(7). The parties, however, agree, and so do we, that plaintiff’s habeas petition, liberally construed, states a claim for habeas corpus relief.

Reversed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM

Plaintiff and the state have filed a joint motion for an order reversing the judgment entered against plaintiff in this habeas corpus case. We grant the motion. In 1986, plaintiff was convicted of multiple felonies and received an 80-year sentence with a 12-year minimum. In May 2000, the Board of Parole and Post-Prision Supervision deferred his release until November 2002 on the ground that he has a “severe emotional disturbance” that “constitutes a danger to the health or safety of the community.” Plaintiff filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that the board lacked authority to extend his release date because there was “no evidence in the record to support the Board’s finding of a ‘present severe emotional disturbance.’ ” The trial court, pursuant to ORS 34.370(6), dismissed the petition, ruling that there were no facts alleged that would entitle plaintiff to habeas corpus relief.

ORS 34.670(6) permits a court to dismiss a habeas petition if it is “meritless.” A meritless petition is one that, “when liberally construed, fails to state a claim upon which habeas corpus relief may be granted.” ORS 34.370(7). The parties, however, agree, and so do we, that plaintiff’s habeas petition, liberally construed, states a claim for habeas corpus relief.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 P.3d 1156, 185 Or. App. 708, 2003 Ore. App. LEXIS 41, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-palmateer-orctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack