Shelby v. Hill
Shelby v. Hill
Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
Under Oregon law, the state parole board had the statutory authority to mandate pre-parole psychological testing before the promulgation of the regulations from which Shelby seeks exemption.
Moreover, the contested regulations were also enacted prior to Shelby’s refusal to participate in psychological testing, so their enforcement would not run afoul of the ex post facto clause.
Shelby’s request for a federal evidentiary hearing is without merit.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
. See Or.Rev.Stat. § 144.223(1) (enacted 1977); Gholston v. Palmateer, 183 Or.App. 7, 51 P.3d 617, 618 (2002).
. See Hunter v. Ayers, 336 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2003).
. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(2).
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Eric V. SHELBY v. Jean HILL
- Status
- Published