The opinion
68 December 24, 2025 No. 1113
This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion
pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited
except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE
STATE OF OREGON
STEPHEN LEE BROWN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Jamie MILLER,
Superintendent,
Snake River Correctional Institution,
Defendant-Respondent.
Malheur County Circuit Court
24CV17383; A186958
Erin K. Landis, Judge.
Submitted October 10, 2025.
Jason Weber and Equal Justice Law filed the brief for
appellant.
Jona J. Maukonen, Assistant Attorney General, waived
appearance for respondent.
Before Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Egan, Judge.
LAGESEN, C. J.
Affirmed.
Nonprecedential Memo Op: 346 Or App 68 (2025) 69
LAGESEN, C. J.
Plaintiff appeals a judgment entered after we
vacated and remanded an earlier judgment dismissing a
writ of habeas corpus. Brown v. Miller, 336 Or App 460 (2024)
(nonprecedential memorandum decision). As we described
in that previous opinion, the habeas court granted a motion
to deny plaintiff’s petition on the ground that he failed to
allege that he was currently subject to the conditions of
which he complained, and that plaintiff failed to allege the
kind of injury required for habeas relief. Id. at 461. However,
because plaintiff had also filed a motion to appoint counsel,
and there was no indication that the court had considered
or ruled on it, we vacated and remanded the judgment of
dismissal “for the habeas corpus court to rule on the motion
for appointment of counsel and make a record of its exercise
of discretion.”
On remand, the court considered and denied plain-
tiff’s motion for appointment of counsel, and it entered the
judgment of dismissal for the same reasons indicated in the
earlier judgment. On appeal, appointed counsel filed a brief
pursuant to ORAP 5.90 and State v. Balfour, 311 Or 434, 814
P2d 1069 (1991). The brief does not contain a Section B. See
ORAP 5.90(1)(b). Having reviewed the record, including the
trial court file, and the Balfour brief, we have identified no
arguably meritorious issues.1
Affirmed.
1
As authorized by ORS 2.570(2)(b), this matter is determined by a two-judge
panel.