
    Submitted June 6,
    OAR 255-094-0006 (2)(d) held valid July 30, 2014
    MARK S. TEAGUE, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION, Respondent.
    
    Agency/Board/Other
    A155566
    332 P3d 370
    Mark S. Teague filed the brief pro se.
    
    Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Anna M. Joyce, Solicitor General, and Karla H. Ferrall, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
    Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and DeVore, Judge, and Garrett, Judge.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

As allowed by ORS 183.400, petitioner seeks a judicial determination of the validity of OAR 255-094-0006(2)(d), a rule adopted by the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision (board). That rule requires “active supervision to the expiration of the indeterminate sentences” for those individuals convicted of certain sex offenses. Petitioner contends that the board exceeded its statutory authority when it adopted the rule because, according to him, ORS 144.085 and ORS 144.103 do not authorize active supervision. We find petitioner’s argument unavailing and conclude that the board did not exceed its authority in adopting OAR 255-094-0006(2)(d).

OAR 255-094-0006(2)(d) held valid.  