White v. Premo

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Post-Conviction Relief
  • Date Filed: 05-17-2017
  • Case #: A154435
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Sercombe, P.J. for the Court; Hadlock, C.J.; & Tookey, J. 
  • Full Text Opinion

Under ORS 138.550, successive petitions for post-conviction relief are procedurally barred from raising the same grounds for relief asserted in a previous petition. Cunio v. Premo, 284 Or App 698 (2017). 

Petitioner appealed the judgment of the post-conviction court that, under ORS 138.550, that once a Petitioner files a petition stating “grounds of relief” in first petition, effectively barred the second petition on raised the same grounds for relief. Petitioner assigned error to the post-conviction court’s dismissal of his Eighth amendment claim. He argued that the “escape clause” provided in ORS 138.550(2) permits successive petitions when the court finds grounds for relief in a subsequent petition that could not have been raised in the original petition. Petitioner relied on Miller, in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Eighth Amendment prohibits sentencing that “mandate[s] life in prison without the possibility of parole for juvenile offenders.” Defendant argued that the petition did not fall within the escape clause, and that the current argument could have been raised in the original petition.  Under ORS 138.550, successive petitions for post-conviction relief are procedurally barred from raising the same grounds for relief asserted in a previous petition. Cunio v. Premo, 284 Or App 698 (2017). The Court of Appeals held that Petitioner raised the same claim in a 1995 petition, and thus, cannot raise the same constitutional claim now because the ORS 138.550(3) bars successive petitions. Affirmed. 

Advanced Search