Case ID: or-app_92/html/0010-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Submitted on record and briefs May 27,
    fine vacated; otherwise affirmed June 29,1988
    ROGER HALL, Petitioner, v. OREGON STATE PENITENTIARY, Respondent.
    
    (08-87-090; CA A46011)
    756 P2d 696
    Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem, filed the brief for petitioner.
    Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, Salem, filed the brief for respondent. With him on the brief were Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, and Philip Schradle, Assistant Attorney General, Salem.
    Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Warren and Rossman, Judges.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

Petitioner seeks review of a final order of the Superintendent which required him to serve six months in segregation and pay a $200 fine for a violation of OAR 291-105-015(14), by attempting to violate the rule against possession of narcotics.

Petitioner contends that the evidence was not sufficient to sustain a finding that he was involved in bringing drugs into the penitentiary. The charge was based on an officer’s report that petitioner had asked the officer if he would bring drugs into prison for him in exchange for money. Petitioner failed a polygraph test. The report of the officer and petitioner’s testimony that he showed his bank book to the officer constitute substantial evidence in support of the findings of the hearings officer. The polygraph test results were admissible as well.

Petitioner also contends that the Superintendent had no authority to fine him. Respondent concedes that, under Watson v. OSP, 90 Or App 85, 750 P2d 1188 (1988), imposition of the fine was erroneous.

Fine vacated; otherwise affirmed.