Thomsen v. Board of Parole

The board’s charge under ORS 163A.100 is to classify sex offenders into one of three notification levels based on their risk of reoffending at the time of the assessment. The 2013 Legislative Assembly, which enacted ORS 163A.100, intentionally enacted “a statute that tasked the board with assessing present risk.”

The petitioner seeks judicial review of a 2022 order setting his sex offender notification level (SONL) at Level 2. He argues that risk assessment rules at release are invalid, as they ignore current evidence of re-offense risk. He contends the board must establish a methodology based on present-day risk factors. “The board’s charge under ORS 163A.100 is to classify sex offenders into one of three notification levels based on their risk of reoffending at the time of the assessment." The court explained that the 2013 Legislative Assembly, which enacted ORS 163A.100, enacted “a statute that tasked the board with assessing present risk.” The Court found that the Board of Parole erred in setting the petitioner’s Sex Offender Notification Level (SONL) at Level 2 under ORS § 163A.100. The Court reasoned that the Board’s methodology, based on OAR 255-085-0005, incorrectly assessed a registrant's present risk of reoffending, rather than their risk at the time of release for the index offense. The Court held that this approach was invalid, as it did not align with the legislative intent of ORS § 163A.100 and created inconsistencies among registrants. Reversed and remanded.