Sharp v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 427 P.3d 1145, 294 Or. App. 506 (2018)

Oct. 17, 2018 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · A167160

427 P.3d 1145, 294 Or. App. 506

Jeffrey G. SHARP, Petitioner,
v.
BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION, Respondent.

A167160

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Submitted August 3, 2018.
October 17, 2018

Jeffrey Sharp filed the briefs pro se.

Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Keith L. Kutler, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Hadlock, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and Aoyagi, Judge.

PER CURIAM

Under ORS 183.400, petitioner challenges OAR 255-032-0005(2), a rule adopted by the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision, asserting that the rule is invalid because it violates two constitutional provisions. See ORS 183.400(4) (court shall declare a rule invalid only if the rule violates constitutional provision, exceeds the statutory authority of the agency that adopted the rule, or was adopted without compliance with applicable rulemaking procedures). Having reviewed the parties' arguments, we reject petitioner's contentions and conclude that the challenged rule is valid.

OAR 255-032-0005(2) held valid.