Case Name: DOUGLAS S. HEMMERICH, Petitioner on review, v. BOARD OF PAROLE, Respondent on review
Court: Oregon Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1987-08-04
Citations: 303 Or. 683
Docket Number: CA A41664; SC S33871
Parties: DOUGLAS S. HEMMERICH, Petitioner on review, v. BOARD OF PAROLE, Respondent on review.
Judges: PER CURIAM
Reporter: Oregon Reports
Volume: 303
Pages: 683–685

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted June 3,
affirmed August 4,
reconsideration denied October 20,1987
DOUGLAS S. HEMMERICH, Petitioner on review, v. BOARD OF PAROLE, Respondent on review.
(CA A41664; SC S33871)
740 P2d 779
Lawrence E. Hall, Deputy Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for petitioner on review. On the petition for review was Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem.
J. Scott McAlister, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent on review. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Petitioner seeks review, alleging that the Board of Parole (Board) failed to satisfy the requirements of ORS 144.135. As in Anderson v. Board of Parole, 303 Or 618, 740 P2d 760 (1987), the Board fully complied with ORS 144.135 by setting forth "in writing the detailed bases for its decision," which included four aggravation factors as justifying its decision to exceed the matrix range by five months.
This petitioner also asserts that the Board failed to consider factors in mitigation, contending that he was innocent and that his case was on appeal at the time of the hearing. Denial of guilt or that the conviction has been appealed are not mitigating factors.
The decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.