BRALY v. OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (2021)

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

John Thomas BRALY, Jr., Petitioner, v. OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent.

A174144

Decided: June 30, 2021

Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and Mooney, Judge.

John Thomas Braly Jr. filed the brief pro se. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Denise G. Fjordbeck, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Under ORS 183.400, petitioner challenges OAR 291-100-0110(1)(d)(A), a rule adopted by the Oregon Department of Corrections (DOC) that provides guidance in the implementation of a sentencing statute, ORS 137.635. According to petitioner, the rule is invalid because “it exceeds DOC's statutory authority and violates express constitutional provisions and prohibitions to the contrary and the plain language of the statute, ORS 137.635.” Having reviewed the parties’ arguments, we reject petitioner's contentions and conclude that the challenged rule is valid. See ORS 183.400(4) (court shall declare a rule invalid only if the rule violates constitutional provisions, exceeds the statutory authority of the agency that adopted the rule, or was adopted without compliance with applicable rulemaking procedures).

OAR 291-100-0110(1)(d)(A) held valid.

PER CURIAM

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network