King v. Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision

When the Parole Board making findings not supported by sufficient evidence, the decision must be remanded for reconsideration absent the erroneous factual findings.

King appealed the Board of Parole's order declining to convert his life sentence without the possibility of parole to life with the possibility of parole. The order was based on the Board's finding that King had not persuaded it that he was likely to be rehabilitated in a reasonable period of time. King argued that several of the factual findings the Board relied on were not supported by substantial evidence. OAR 255-032-0020 sets out factors to be considered during a murder review hearing. The Board found that King had not worked while incarcerated, but that finding was not supported by substantial evidence because King's institutional employment history reflects the opposite. The Board's finding that King lacked "a sense of personal responsibility" because he had not repaid his defense of incarceration costs was not supported by sufficient evidence because King was not ordered to repay those costs until after his release. The Board's finding that King was "still involved in an adventure-seeking, risk-taking lifestyle" was not supported by sufficient evidence because the facts relied on in making the finding could equally support other inferences. The Board's decision must be sent back for consideration without relying on the erroneous factual findings. Reversed and remanded.