Case Name: BARRY DEWAYNE BREY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Don MILLS, Superintendent, Two Rivers Correctional Institution, Defendant-Respondent
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 2009-08-05
Citations: 230 Or. App. 243
Docket Number: CV081751; A140858
Parties: BARRY DEWAYNE BREY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Don MILLS, Superintendent, Two Rivers Correctional Institution, Defendant-Respondent.
Judges: Before Haselton, Presiding Judge, and Armstrong, Judge, and Rosenblum, Judge.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 230
Pages: 243–244

Head Matter:
Submitted July 2,
reversed and remanded August 5, 2009
BARRY DEWAYNE BREY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Don MILLS, Superintendent, Two Rivers Correctional Institution, Defendant-Respondent.
Umatilla County Circuit Court
CV081751; A140858
213 P3d 862
James N. Varner filed the brief for appellant.
John R. Kroger, Attorney General, Jerome Lidz, Solicitor General, and Kathleen Cegla, Attorney-in-Charge, Collateral Remedies, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Haselton, Presiding Judge, and Armstrong, Judge, and Rosenblum, Judge.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Petitioner appeals a general judgment dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief with prejudice. The trial court did not hold a hearing before dismissing the petition on the ground that it was time-barred. A discussion of the facts would not benefit the bench, the bar, or the public. Respondent concedes that, under Ware v. Hall, 342 Or 444, 154 P3d 118 (2007), and Harding v. Hall, 210 Or App 753, 152 P3d 987 (2007), "petitioner is entitled either to a hearing on the issue of whether his untimely, successive petition should be allowed to go forward, or to a dismissal without prejudice." (Emphasis in original.) We accept the concession as well founded.
Reversed and remanded.