OR: Lane County class-action suit challenges Oregon’s sex offender registry risk classification

R H

Source: statesmanjournal.com 4/14/26

A class action lawsuit filed in Lane County on April 2 against the Oregon State Police and the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision alleges individuals on Oregon’s sex offender registry have been systematically misclassified as a higher risk than they are.

The plaintiff in the case, identified in court documents only as M.H., claims to be one of those people. In January 1990, he was convicted on three counts of first-degree sexual abuse in the Lane County Circuit Court. He was sentenced to incarceration and supervision, which he completed in 1998. Since then, he has married, raised a family, started a business and built a stable life, the complaint says.

According to the suit, the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision, a state agency responsible for assigning sex-offender notification levels, conducted a community risk assessment for the first time on M.H. in 2024. The Board assigned him the highest risk classification available without consideration of …

Read the full article

NOTE: You need to dismiss the pop-up ad to read the article

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

If you are feeling extremely depressed and possibly even suicidal, please call or text 988 (suicide hotline) or any loved one who you believe is immediately available. If you feel depressed and in need of a friendly community and unbiased emotional support, you can email Alex and Marty at emotionalsupportgroup@all4consolaws.org

 

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify or abbreviate their name. 
  24. Please check for typos, spelling, punctuation, and grammar errors before submitting.  Comments that have many errors will not be approved. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

9 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

This is behind a pay wall.
[Moderators note: You need to dismiss the pop-up ad to read the article]

1
Reply

A positive step. My life was also upended and I am indeed facing serious financial hardship after being moved from, a “no post” of 23 years to Tier 3, when SB 384 passed. I don’t think I was subject to a static 99r assessment in 1997, but in any case, it looks like CA currently determines classifications based upon offense. I’d love for them to classify me by my current risk level today, after 28 years. Probably -3.

2
Reply
View Replies (3)

1990 someone commits a crime, does his time, and becomes successful as a law abiding citizen. On what planet does placing him in a higher tier for the first time in 2024 make any sense. These people must live on Neptune or Uranus.

1
Reply
View Replies (1)

We need to see more class action suits across the country against LE agencies and state governments. It’s wrong and unconstitutional that this blatant discrimination against people who paid for their offense years ago is allowed to continue and flourish simply because people can’t deal rationally with an offense with the word s3x in it.

4
Reply
View Replies (1)