Barrett v. Board of Parole
336 Or. App. 215
Or. Ct. App.2024Background
- Petitioner, Jacob Barrett, was convicted in 1994 of aggravated murder and first-degree robbery, receiving a life sentence with a 30-year minimum and a consecutive 72-month robbery sentence.
- In 2021, the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision (the board) found Barrett likely to be rehabilitated and set his parole eligibility for the aggravated murder conviction.
- Barrett was not released at that time due to the consecutive robbery sentence.
- Barrett challenged the board’s parole release decision (Board Action Form #8), primarily arguing the calculation of consecutive terms and the alleged disregard of his earned-time credits.
- The board considered most of Barrett’s arguments untimely or not relevant to the decision at issue (BAF #8), stating they should have been raised in review of BAF #7.
- Barrett also asserted a due process violation, claiming the board acted beyond its statutory authority regarding his earned-time credits.
Issues
| Issue | Barrett's Argument | Board's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calculation of consecutive terms | Board erred by summing/unsumming sentences, affecting release date | Not at issue in exit interview; addressed in other proceedings | Not properly before the court |
| Consideration of earned-time credits | Parole release date should reflect DOC’s earned-time calculation | DOC, not the board, determines credits; board sets release date | Board did not err; DOC responsible for credits |
| Procedural due process | Board denied due process by adjusting earned-time date without authority | Board did not adjust earned-time date; DOC applies credits | No due process violation; board acted properly |
| Timeliness of arguments | Challenges to sentence calculations were timely in BAF #8 review | Arguments must be raised in proper proceeding (i.e., BAF #7 appeal) | Arguments untimely or improperly raised |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Barrett, 331 Or 27 (Ore. 2000) (original conviction and sentencing context)
- Martinez v. Cain, 366 Or 136 (Ore. 2020) (overruling part of Barrett concerning sentencing interpretation)
- Wyatt v. Board of Parole, 230 Or App 581 (Ore. Ct. App. 2009) (judicial review scope tied to actual order challenged)
- State ex rel Engweiler v. Cook, 340 Or 373 (Ore. 2006) (earned-time credits on indeterminate sentences post-release date)