Opinion · Oregon Supreme Court

Hines v. Board of Parole

303 Or. 662

Type: Opinion
Court: Oregon Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Date: 1987-08-04
Topic: general

GILLETTE, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. For the reasons expressed in my dissenting opinion in Anderson v. Board of Parole, 303 Or 618, 632, 740 P2d 760, 769 (1987), I respectfully dissent from that portion of this opinion dealing with a “detailed explanation,” under ORS 144.135, of the action taken by the Board of Parole with respect to the mandatory minimum sentence. I concur with the balance of the opinion. Linde, J., joins in this concurring and dissenting opinion.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Hines v. Board of Parole. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

GILLETTE, J.,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

For the reasons expressed in my dissenting opinion in Anderson v. Board of Parole, 303 Or 618, 632, 740 P2d 760, 769 (1987), I respectfully dissent from that portion of this opinion dealing with a “detailed explanation,” under ORS 144.135, of the action taken by the Board of Parole with respect to the mandatory minimum sentence. I concur with the balance of the opinion.

Linde, J., joins in this concurring and dissenting opinion.