Sharp v. Board of Parole
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
506 October 17, 2018 No. 513 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON JEFFREY G. SHARP, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION, Respondent. Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision A167160 Submitted August 3, 2018. Jeffrey Sharp filed the briefs pro se. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Keith L. Kutler, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Hadlock, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and Aoyagi, Judge. PER CURIAM OAR 255-032-0005(2) held valid. Cite as 294 Or App 506 (2018) 507 PER CURIAM Under ORS 183.400, petitioner challenges OAR 255-032-0005(2), a rule adopted by the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision, asserting that the rule is invalid because it violates two constitutional provisions. See ORS 183.400(4) (court shall declare a rule invalid only if the rule violates constitutional provision, exceeds the statutory authority of the agency that adopted the rule, or was adopted without compliance with applicable rulemaking procedures). Having reviewed the parties’ arguments, we reject petitioner’s contentions and conclude that the challenged rule is valid. OAR 255-032-0005(2) held valid.
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.
