Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Oregon » 2005 » A123754 Ward v. Dehaan
A123754 Ward v. Dehaan
State: Oregon
Docket No: A123754
Case Date: 05/25/2005

FILED: May 25, 2005

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

JASON MCKINLEY WARD,

Petitioner,

v.

BEN DEHAAN, ET AL.,

Respondent.

A123754

Judicial Review from Department of Corrections.

Submitted on record and briefs May 6, 2005.

Jason McKinley Ward filed the briefs pro se.

Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Paul L. Smith, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Haselton, Presiding Judge, and Linder and Ortega, Judges.

PER CURIAM

OAR 291-203-0010 to 291-203-0100 and OAR 291-105-0005 to 291- 105-0100 held valid.

PER CURIAM

Petitioner, a prison inmate, challenges various Department of Corrections administrative rules pursuant to ORS 183.400. In particular, he asserts that various provisions authorizing the recoupment of costs of inmate care set out in OAR 291-203-0010 to 291-203-0100, and other provisions authorizing imposition of disciplinary fines set out in OAR 291-105-0005 to 291-105-0100, violate Article III, section 1, and Article XV, section 10, of the Oregon Constitution, and are also preempted under provisions of federal law. We reject petitioner's challenges and write only to address his challenge under Article XV, section 10. (1)

Respondent argues, and we agree, that Article XV, section 10, is inapposite for either of two reasons. First, this court struck down Article XV, section 10, in Lincoln Interagency Narcotics Team v. Kitzhaber, 188 Or App 526, 72 P3d 967 (2003), rev allowed, 336 Or 376 (2004). Second, that provision applies only to "civil forfeiture proceeding[s]," and none of the challenged rules implicates a civil forfeiture proceeding.

OAR 291-203-0010 to 291-203-0100 and OAR 291-105-0005 to 291-105-0100 held valid.

1.  Article XV, section 10(3), provides, in part:

"No judgment of forfeiture of property in a civil forfeiture proceeding by the State or any of its political subdivisions shall be allowed or entered until and unless the owner of the property is convicted of a crime in Oregon or another jurisdiction and the property is found by clear and convincing evidence to have been instrumental in committing or facilitating the crime or to be proceeds of that crime."

Return to previous location.

Preview:FILED: July 13, 2011 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. JUSTIN DEWAIN DALBY, Defendant-Appellant. Multnomah County Circuit Court 090748295 A143586

Edward J. Jones, Judge. Submitted on June 08, 2011. Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, and Morgen E. Daniels, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant. John R. Kroger, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Tiffany Keast, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Brewer, Chief Judge, and Gillette, Senior Judge. PER CURIAM Reversed and remanded. State v. Rainoldi, 236 Or App 129, 235 P3d 710 (2010), rev allowed, 349 Or 654 (2011).

Download A143586 State v. Dalby.pdf

Oregon Law

Oregon State Laws
Oregon Tax
Oregon Court
    > Muller v. Oregon
Oregon Labor Laws
Oregon Agencies
    > DMV Oregon

Comments

Tips