Case Name: RODGER ROBERT ANSTETT, Appellant, v. S. Frank THOMPSON, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary, Respondent
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 2001-05-23
Citations: 174 Or. App. 393
Docket Number: 97C-12303; A102496
Parties: RODGER ROBERT ANSTETT, Appellant, v. S. Frank THOMPSON, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary, Respondent.
Judges: Before Haselton, Presiding Judge, and Edmonds and Landau, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 174
Pages: 393–394

Head Matter:
Submitted on remand from the Oregon Supreme Court July 13, 2000,
reversed and remanded May 23, 2001
RODGER ROBERT ANSTETT, Appellant, v. S. Frank THOMPSON, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary, Respondent.
97C-12303; A102496
25 P3d 414
Steven H. Gorham for appellant.
Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Michael D. Reynolds, Solicitor General, and Judy C. Lucas, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
Before Haselton, Presiding Judge, and Edmonds and Landau, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Plaintiff appeals from the trial court's dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The crimes for which he is incarcerated took place during the time period when the administrative rule discussed in Peek v. Thompson, 160 Or App 260, 980 P2d 178, rev dismissed 329 Or 553 (1999), was in effect. We reverse and remand with instructions for the trial court to consider plaintiffs arguments in light of Peek and in light of the standard of review enunciated in Hamel v. Johnson, 173 Or App 448, 25 P3d 314 (2001).
Reversed and remanded.