The Oregon Court of Appeals has sided with Governor Brown in the case of Marteeny v. Brown in which Linn County District Attorney Douglas R. Marteeny and Lane County District Attorney Patricia W. Perlow asked the Court to reverse a decision of the lower court and keep the Governor from granting clemency to 1,073 felons.

The actions of Governor Brown were affirmed by a three-judge panel from the Oregon Court of Appeals which included judges, Bronson D. James, Robyn Aoyagi, and Ramón A. Pagán. According to an opinion of the Court, "The grants of clemency at issue in this case were a lawful exercise of the Governor’s power under Article V, section 14."

In 2020 and 2021, Oregon Governor Kate Brown granted clemency to approximately 1,026 convicted felons, comprising three groups: (1) individuals “vulnerable to the effects of COVID-19,” (2) individuals who had fought “the historic wildfires that ravaged the state around Labor Day 2020,” and (3) 73 individuals who were sentenced as juveniles before the passage of SB 1008 in 2019.

According to the Court, the power of the Governor to pardon is enshrined in the Oregon Constitution. Article V, section 14 provides: “[The Governor] shall have power to grant reprieves, commutations, and pardons, after conviction, for all offences except treason, subject to such regulations as may be provided by law. Upon conviction for treason he shall have power to suspend the execution of the sentence until the case shall be reported to the Legislative Assembly, at its next meeting, when the Legislative Assembly shall either grant a pardon, commute the sentence, direct the execution of the sentence, or grant a farther reprieve.”

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

SB 1008 made substantial changes to the prosecution and sentencing of juvenile offenders, including providing for early release hearings, conducted by the Board of Parole and Post-Prison supervision, after 15 years of incarceration. The legislature did not make SB 1008 retroactive. The effect of the Governor's commutation order for these 73 individuals was to afford them the same procedure, under ORS 144.397, that would be afforded to a juvenile offender convicted today. Four family members of victims of the crimes of which some of the youth prisoners were convicted petitioned the Marion County Circuit Court for a writ of mandamus directing the Governor, the Department of Corrections, the Oregon Youth Authority, and the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision "to honor and follow all procedural and substantive provisions of Oregon law." In their legal arguments, they argue that the commutations here were procedurally flawed, and unlawful for a variety of reasons. According to a media release by the Oregon Court of Appeals, "underlying those technical arguments exists a palpable emotion that deserves acknowledgement: they feel that they have been denied justice."

The Court of Appeals explained that clemency power of presidents and governors traces its origins to the earliest days of English common law. The arguments and emotions present in this case echo through the centuries. The power to pardon, sitting within a singular executive -- be they monarch, president, or governor -- has always been controversial, seemingly at odds with legislative determination and judicial decision-making. Whenever it has been used, it has been lauded by some, and condemned by others.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2022-08-12 16:06:19

Last Update: 2022-08-12 16:43:50