Case Name: LESLIE A. WHALEY, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1993-05-12
Citations: 120 Or. App. 224
Docket Number: CA A69239
Parties: LESLIE A. WHALEY, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent.
Judges: Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Edmonds and Leeson, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 120
Pages: 224–225

Head Matter:
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

Opinion:
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.