Atkinson v. Board of Parole

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
  • Date Filed: 08-31-2016
  • Case #: A152750
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Armstrong, P.J. for the Court; Egan, J.; & Shorr, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Under Janowski/Fleming v. Board of Parole, an inmate is not entitled to immediate release if a release date has not been set, even if it should have been set for a date that has already passed. The only relief an inmate is entitled to is a release hearing.

Atkinson sought judicial review of an order from the Board of Parole and Post Prison Supervision (Board) that established his matrix range at 228 to 288 months and established a projected parole release date of June 28, 2013. Atkinson argued the Board erred in holding a second prison term hearing and imposing a different grid matrix than originally imposed, and that he was entitled to release because his release date had already passed. The Board renewed its contention on appeal that the issue was moot. The Board had previously held release hearings in 2012 and 2014, and found cause to push Atkinson’s release date back by two years both times. The Court agreed with the Board under the standard announced in Janowski/Fleming v. Board of Parole, 349 Or 432, (2010), holding that the issue was moot, because the only relief an inmate is entitled to is a release hearing, at which the Board could find cause to postpone the inmate’s release date. Because Atkinson had already received two release hearings, a judicial decision would have no practical effect on Atkinson’s rights so the issue was moot. Petition for judicial review dismissed.

Advanced Search