# Long v. Board of Parole

> Court of Appeals of Oregon · December 24, 2025 · 346 Or. App. 70

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11233431

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Oregon
- **Decided:** December 24, 2025
- **Citations:** 346 Or. App. 70
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Egan
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11233431

## Opinion text

70 December 24, 2025 No. 1114

This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion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

JOSEPH CHARLES LONG,
Petitioner,
v.
BOARD OF PAROLE
AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION,
Respondent.
A184852

Submitted November 14, 2025.
Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate
Section, Oregon Public Defense Commission, filed the brief
for petitioner.
Philip Thoennes, Assistant Attorney General, waived
appearance for respondent.
Before Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Egan, Judge.
EGAN, J.
Affirmed.
Nonprecedential Memo Op: 346 Or App 70 (2025) 71

EGAN, J.
Petitioner seeks judicial review of a final order of
the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision (board).
Petitioner’s 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).
We affirm.1
The board revoked petitioner’s supervision and
imposed a 90-day sanction based on its determinations that
petitioner had violated conditions of his supervision requir-
ing him to report to his supervisory officer as directed, obey
all laws, and have no contact with specified individuals.
Having reviewed the record and the Balfour brief, we have
identified no arguably meritorious issues.
Affirmed.

1
As authorized by ORS 2.570(2)(b), this matter is determined by a two-judge
panel.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11233431. Public record. Not legal advice.