Barker v. Ireland

Decision Date10 June 1964
Citation238 Or. 1,392 P.2d 769
PartiesRoland BARKER, Appellant, v. Hallie IRELAND, Respondent.
CourtOregon Supreme Court

Howard R. Lonergan, Portland, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was John W. Hathaway, Tillamook.

David B. Williamson, Dist. Atty., St. Helens, argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent.

Before McALLISTER, C. J., and PERRY, SLOAN, GOODWIN, and DENECKE, JJ.

GOODWIN, Justice.

Barker was arrested under a warrant issued by the Circuit Court for Columbia County, and is being held by the defendant sheriff of Tillamook County pursuant to said warrant. He appeals from an order dismissing a writ of habeas corpus.

The warrant under which Barker is being held is valid on its face. It was issued by a circuit judge pursuant to an application filed by a representative of the State Board of Parole and Probation charging Barker with certain violations of the terms and conditions of his probation. See ORS 137.550(2). Barker had been placed on probation by the same court two years earlier after conviction of a felony.

Barker attempts in these proceedings to litigate the truth or falsity of the charges that he had violated his probation. Under ORS 137.550(2), the court that places a convict on probation may order his arrest at any time during probation. (Also, an officer of the State Board of Parole and Probation who has probable cause to believe that the convict has violated his probation may arrest such a person without a warrant at any time during probation.) Thereafter, the court may, at a summary hearing, revoke the probation and sentence the convicted person to any term in the penitentiary for which he could have been sentenced upon the original conviction. Bryant v. State, 233 Or. 459, 461, 378 P.2d 951 (1963). Cf. Anderson v. Alexander, 191 Or. 409, 229 P.2d 633, 230 P.2d 770, 29 A.L.R.2d 1051 (1951), holding that parole, as distinguished from probation, can be revoked without a hearing.

The purpose of the summary hearing referred to in ORS 137.550(2) is to afford the person on probation an opportunity to be heard in the event that he disputes any of the allegations made against him by the probation officer or other person seeking the revocation of probation. At such a hearing it is the duty of the trial court to decide what the facts are and then to exercise its discretion in one of two ways. The court may permit the convict to remain on probation, or may revoke the probation and order the convict held for the execution of any sentence provided by law. It is not necessary to revocation that the person on probation be convicted of a new crime, but only that the trial judge be satisfied that the purposes of probation are not being served,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
54 cases
  • State v. Martin
    • United States
    • Oregon Court of Appeals
    • July 28, 2021
    ...convicted of a crime, his freedom is not a matter of right, but rather extended to him as a matter of discretion. Barker v. Ireland , 238 Or. 1, 4, 392 P.2d 769 (1964). As a result, a defendant during a probation revocation hearing has no Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses. State v......
  • State v. Martin
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • December 30, 2022
    ...of discretion for the trial court. See ORS 137.545(5) (providing that a court "may" revoke probation); see also Barker v. Ireland , 238 Or. 1, 4, 392 P.2d 769 (1964) ("At [a probation revocation] hearing it is the duty of the trial court to decide what the facts are and then to exercise its......
  • State v. Hughes, 54565
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • September 19, 1972
    ...48, 259 N.E.2d 846; Kennedy v. Maxwell, 176 Ohio St. 215, 198 N.E.2d 658; Wrone v. Page, 481 P.2d 479 (Okl.Cr.App.); Barker v. Ireland, 238 Or. 1, 392 P.2d 769; Toran v. State, 466 S.W.2d 320 III. Admission of Report. Defendant's last contention is that the parole officer's report should no......
  • State v. Dowty
    • United States
    • Oregon Court of Appeals
    • October 9, 2019
    ...relying instead on defendant’s zero-tolerance stipulation as the basis for its revocation decision. Referencing Barker v. Ireland , 238 Or. 1, 4, 392 P.2d 769 (1964) ("Probation is not a matter of right, but a matter of discretion."), and OAR 213-010-0001 ("The decision to revoke probation ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT