Oregon § 423.425 Investigatory authority

Oregon Statutes

§ 423.425 — Investigatory authority

Oregon § 423.425

Vol.11

Title 34Human Services; Juvenile Code; Corrections

Ch. 423Corrections and Crime Control Administration and Programs

This text of Oregon § 423.425 (Investigatory authority) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Or. Rev. Stat. § 423.425 (2026).

Text

(1)The Corrections Ombudsman shall investigate, on complaint or on the ombudsman’s own motion, any corrections action that is or is alleged to be:

(a)Contrary to or inconsistent with law or Department of Corrections practice;

(b)Based on mistaken facts or irrelevant considerations;

(c)Inadequately explained when reasons should have been revealed;

(d)Inefficiently performed; or

(e)Unreasonable, unfair, or otherwise objectionable, even though in accordance with law.

(2)Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, the Corrections Ombudsman may decide not to investigate because:

(a)The complainant could reasonably be expected to use a different administrative remedy or action;

(b)The complaint is trivial, frivolous, vexatious or not made in good faith; or

(c)The complaint has been

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

(1) The Corrections Ombudsman shall investigate, on complaint or on the ombudsman’s own motion, any corrections action that is or is alleged to be:
(a) Contrary to or inconsistent with law or Department of Corrections practice;
(b) Based on mistaken facts or irrelevant considerations;
(c) Inadequately explained when reasons should have been revealed;
(d) Inefficiently performed; or
(e) Unreasonable, unfair, or otherwise objectionable, even though in accordance with law.
(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, the Corrections Ombudsman may decide not to investigate because:
(a) The complainant could reasonably be expected to use a different administrative remedy or action;
(b) The complaint is trivial, frivolous, vexatious or not made in good faith; or
(c) The complaint has been too long delayed to justify present examination.