Case ID: or-app_120/html/0224-01.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 March 19,
    rules held valid May 12, 1993
    LESLIE A. WHALEY, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent.
    
    (CA A69239)
    852 P2d 200
    Leslie A. Whaley, Salem, filed the brief pro se.
    
    Charles S. Crookham, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, and Richard D. Wasserman, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed the brief for respondent.
    Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Edmonds and Leeson, Judges.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

Petitioner challenges the validity of OAR 291-158-005; OAR 291-158-010; OAR 291-158-015 and OAR 291-158-015(10) as not having been adopted in compliance with the notice provision of ORS 183.335(2)(a) and OAR chapter 291, division 1. The notice given complied with the applicable statute and administrative rules.

Rules held valid.