Teague v. Board of Parole

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED: July 30, 2014 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON MARK S. TEAGUE, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION, Respondent. Agency/Board/Other A155566 Submitted on June 6, 2014. Mark S. Teague filed the brief pro se. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Anna M. Joyce, Solicitor General, and Karla H. Ferrall, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and DeVore, Judge, and Garrett, Judge. PER CURIAM OAR 255-094-0006(2)(d) held valid. 1 PER CURIAM 2 As allowed by ORS 183.400, petitioner seeks a judicial determination of 3 the validity of OAR 255-094-0006(2)(d), a rule adopted by the Board of Parole and Post- 4 Prison Supervision (board). That rule requires "active supervision to the expiration of the 5 indeterminate sentences" for those individuals convicted of certain sex offenses. 6 Petitioner contends that the board exceeded its statutory authority when it adopted the 7 rule because, according to him, ORS 144.085 and ORS 144.103 do not authorize active 8 supervision. We find petitioner's argument unavailing and conclude that the board did 9 not exceed its authority in adopting OAR 255-094-0006(2)(d). 10 OAR 255-094-0006(2)(d) held valid. 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.