Opinion

Asher v. State Board of Parole

  • 100 Or. App. 592
  • 786 P.2d 1323
  • 1990 Ore. App. LEXIS 161
Court
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Filed
Feb 21, 1990
Status
Published
On the bench
Deits, Newman, Richardson
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 17.1%

The opinion

PER CURIAM

Petitioner seeks review of a Board of Parole order that revoked his parole. He contends that, at the time of the Board’s action, he was no longer on parole, because his “good time” release date had passed. However a prisoner does not accumulate good time while on parole, and the original good time release date is suspended. Ventris v. Maass, 99 Or App 85 , 781 P2d 1224 (1989), rev den 309 Or 231 (1990).

Petitioner also contends that the Board improperly denied his request for appointed counsel for the revocation hearing. Petitioner never denied that he violated the conditions of parole or presented any reason justifying appointment of counsel. The Board did not err in denying his request. ORS 144.343(3) (f).

Petitioner’s remaining contention does not warrant discussion.

Affirmed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.