McKinley v. Roberts

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED: September 19, 2012 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON RANDY TODD McKINLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GREG ROBERTS, Superintendent, Oregon State Hospital, Defendant-Respondent. Marion County Circuit Court 11C13099 A148264 Joseph V. Ochoa, Judge. Submitted on August 03, 2012. Erin Galli and Chilton & Galli, LLC, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Anna M. Joyce, Solicitor General, and Christina M. Hutchins, Senior Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Schuman, Presiding Judge, and Wollheim, Judge, and Nakamoto, Judge. PER CURIAM Reversed and remanded. 1 PER CURIAM 2 Plaintiff, who is a patient in the Oregon State Hospital, sought a writ of 3 habeas corpus, alleging that he is suffering health problems as a consequence of a poor 4 ventilation system in the hospital. The trial court, on its own motion, dismissed plaintiff's 5 petition for failure to state a claim for relief. 6 On appeal, plaintiff contends that this case is controlled by the Supreme 7 Court's decision in Bedell v. Scheidler, 307 Or 562, 570, 770 P2d 909 (1989), a case in 8 which an inmate at a corrections center alleged that her constitutional rights had been 9 violated because of inadequate ventilation and circulation of clean air at the facility. The 10 inmate's allegations, the court held, "established her right to a hearing at which she will 11 have a full and fair opportunity to present her evidence." Id. 12 Defendant, the superintendant of the hospital, concedes that plaintiff's 13 allegations are "virtually indistinguishable from the allegations that the Oregon Supreme 14 Court held in Bedell required issuance of the writ," and that the trial court therefore erred 15 in sua sponte dismissing plaintiff's petition. We agree, accept the concession of error, 16 and reverse and remand for further proceedings. 17 Reversed and remanded. 1

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.