# Coleman v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

> Court of Appeals of Oregon · November 13, 1996 · 144 Or. App. 487

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6942690

## Case

- **Full name:** RICHARD RENE COLEMAN v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Oregon
- **Decided:** November 13, 1996
- **Citations:** 144 Or. App. 487; 927 P.2d 622; 1996 Ore. App. LEXIS 1678
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Edmonds, Landau, Warren
- **Cited by:** 2 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/6942690

## Opinion text

PER CURIAM
Petitioner seeks review of an order of the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision establishing conditions of post-prison supervision. Most of his arguments are resolved by our decisions in Schuch v. Board of Parole, 139 Or App 327 , 912 P2d 403 , rev den 324 Or 78 (1996), and Gress v. Board of Parole, 143 Or App 7 , 924 P2d 329 , mod on recons 144 Or App 375 , 927 P2d 138 (1996). We do not discuss those arguments any further.
Petitioner also argues that the Board did not have the authority to designate him a “high risk dangerous offender,” because only a court may decide that a person is a “dangerous offender” under ORS 161.725 to ORS 161.737. Petitioner misunderstands the Board’s action. It did not purport to determine that he is a dangerous offender under the statute. Instead, it determined that he needed a higher level of supervision than do most persons on post-prison supervision. The similarity of terminology does not reflect a similarity of authority or of effect.
Affirmed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6942690. Public record. Not legal advice.