Oregon Appellate Court - September 5, 2013
by: Abassos • September 6, 2013 • no comments
(Created page with "<summary hidden> *Unlawful Sound Recording is Preempted by Copyright Act - But Only for Recordings after February, 1972 *Parole Board Must Provide Some Reasoning for a Parole ...") |
|||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
'''Parole Board Must Provide Some Reasoning for a Parole Denial''' | '''Parole Board Must Provide Some Reasoning for a Parole Denial''' | ||
| − | When the Parole Board denies parole, it must provide "substantial reason" so a reviewing court | + | When the Parole Board denies parole, it must provide "substantial reason" so a reviewing court may "determine if the board's findings, reasoning, and conclusions demonstrate that it acted in a rational, fair, and principled manner in deciding to defer petitioner's parole release." Here, the board offered a mere conclusion with "boilerplate" language. Thus, the parole denial is reversed and remanded for the board to provide an explanation. [http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A144545.pdf Jenkins v Board of Parole and PPS], ___ Or App ___ (2013) |
{{wl-publish: 2013-09-06 08:39:40 -0700 | Abassos:Alex Bassos }} | {{wl-publish: 2013-09-06 08:39:40 -0700 | Abassos:Alex Bassos }} | ||
Latest revision as of 08:40, September 7, 2013
Unlawful Sound Recording is Preempted by Copyright Act - But Only for Recordings after February, 1972
ORS 164.865(1)(b), Unlawful Sound Recording, is only preempted by section 301 of the Copyright act for recordings made after February 15, 1972. Per curiam, reconsideration granted, opinion modified. State v Oidor, ___ Or App ___ (2013)
Parole Board Must Provide Some Reasoning for a Parole Denial
When the Parole Board denies parole, it must provide "substantial reason" so a reviewing court may "determine if the board's findings, reasoning, and conclusions demonstrate that it acted in a rational, fair, and principled manner in deciding to defer petitioner's parole release." Here, the board offered a mere conclusion with "boilerplate" language. Thus, the parole denial is reversed and remanded for the board to provide an explanation. Jenkins v Board of Parole and PPS, ___ Or App ___ (2013)
