Categories: Oregon Supreme Court

WEBB v. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, 326 Or. 524 (1998)

952 P.2d 59

John R. WEBB, Lynn Ogen, the John R. Webb Family Trust, James Little, Lyna Little, the Lyna Little Trust, Billy Cooper, Betty Cooper, Deborah Phillips, Harold Wickersham, Bernard J. Stormberg, Dolores P. Stormberg, The Citizens Group, Peggie Foy, Elaine Killen, Bruce Killen, Steve Arnold, Gretchen Arnold, and John L. Traynor, MD, Petitioners, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Corrections Facility Siting Authority and John A. Kitzhaber, Respondents.

SC S44330Oregon Supreme Court.Argued and submitted March 3, 1998
Decisions of the Department of Corrections, The Corrections Facility Siting Authority, And the Governor affirmed March 19, 1998

On judicial review of the decisions of the Department of Corrections, the Corrections Facility Siting Authority, and the Governor.

John R. Huttl, of Frohnmayer, Deatherage, Pratt, Jamieson
Clarke, Medford, argued the cause and filed the briefs for petitioners.

Robert M. Atkinson, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause and filed the brief for respondents. With him on the brief were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Michael D. Reynolds, Solicitor General.

En Banc

PER CURIAM

The decisions of the Department of Corrections, the Corrections Facility Siting Authority, and the Governor are affirmed.

Page 525

[EDITORS’ NOTE: THIS PAGE IS BLANK.]

Page 526

PER CURIAM

This is a case of direct review of decisions by the Corrections Facility Siting Authority and the Governor to approve, and by the Department of Corrections to site, a prison at Stimpson Gulch in Jackson County.[1] Petitioners own property in the vicinity of the proposed site. They challenge the siting decisions, raising several statutory and constitutional issues. We have considered all of petitioners’ challenges, but conclude that they either are controlled by this court’s decision in City of Wilsonville v. Dept. of Corrections, 326 Or. 152, 951 P.2d 128
(1997), or otherwise are not well taken.

The decisions of the Department of Corrections, the Corrections Facility Siting Authority, and the Governor are affirmed.

[1] See ORS 421.611 to 421.630 (setting out siting process and authorizing Supreme Court review of siting decisions).

Page 527

jdjungle

Share
Published by
jdjungle
Tags: 952 P.2d 59

Recent Posts

STATE v. MCCARTHY, 501 P.3d 478 (2021)

501 P.3d 478 (2021)369 Or. 129 STATE of Oregon, Respondent on Review, v. Charles Steven…

8 months ago

STATE EX REL. S.M. v. A.S., 196 P.3d 26 (2008)

044230S0; A134887. 196 P.3d 26 (2008) 223 Or. App. 421 STATE of Oregon ex rel.…

7 years ago

STATE v. McNALLY, 361 Or. 314 (2017)

April 20, 2017 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON STATE OF OREGON, Respondent…

9 years ago

STATE v. HAUGEN, 361 Or. 284 (2017)

March 30, 2017 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON STATE OF OREGON,…

9 years ago

IN THE MATTER OF BROWN, 361 Or. 241 (2017)

361 Or. 241 In the Matter of the Compensation of Royce L. Brown, Sr., Claimant.…

9 years ago

IN RE ROLLER, 361 Or 234 (2017)

234                                  March 9, 2017                              No. 17 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE…

9 years ago