Court releases Oregon man from prison, ruling governor’s order illegally kept him there

For nearly a year, Loran Beck believed he did not belong in an Oregon state prison – even though Oregon’s governor sent him there.

On Sept. 19, a Multnomah County District Court judge found that Beck, not the governor, was correct. After Judge Michael Greenlick heard the case, he ordered Beck’s immediate release.

“I don’t want to spend another day drafting an opinion if it’s going to delay his release by another day because I do believe he has served approximately eight months longer than was legal – legally allowable,” Greenlick said, according to a court transcript of the hearing.

Beck, 46, is among a growing group of Oregonians who have successfully sued Gov. Tina Kotek while incarcerated and earned court orders that secured their immediate release. For four people, judges from four different courts have found Kotek’s orders to revoke their commuted prison sentences illegally extended their sentences. Another case is pending.

Oregon woman endures fear and despair in illegal imprisonment in Coffee Creek prison

The growing number troubles advocates for the incarcerated in Oregon and raises questions about how many other similarly-situated people are sitting in state prisons illegally. During the pandemic, then-Gov. Kate Brown commuted the sentences of more than 1,000 people.

Since Kotek took office in 2023, she revoked the commutations of at least 122 of these people, sending them back to prison, court records show. But in cases like Beck’s and the three others, attorneys have successfully argued that Kotek’s orders unconstitutionally extended sentences.

“We now have several court orders stating that Oregonians have been illegally imprisoned as a result of the governor’s actions, and it’s extremely disturbing that it took the intervention of the courts to right these wrongs,” said Malori Maloney, Beck’s attorney and associate director of the Oregon Justice Resource Center’s FA:IR Law Project that works to address systemic failures in the justice system. “The governor should have corrected her error as soon as it became clear that their imprisonment was unlawful.”

Governor’s office says little

Roxy Mayer, a spokesperson for the governor, would not answer a detailed list of questions about the case, including whether the four rulings have changed how the governor handles commutation recovations or whether she has concerns about future court cases or the legality of her orders in other cases that involve incarcerated people.

Instead, Mayer sent a vague four-sentence statement that said the governor reviews each case individually as requested by district attorneys.

“The governor respects the court’s decision and will take this ruling under advisement,” Mayer said, adding that the governor is “committed to a transparent and consistent process.”

Public court records and interviews show how the process unfolded – and how the governor’s order illegally kept Beck in prison.

“I think a huge issue that we’re seeing across the board with the governor’s commutation revocations is the lack of transparency,” Maloney said. “We don’t know for certain why the governor revoked his commutation because the revocation order just says that she has found that he violated a condition of the commutation. It doesn’t say what the condition is, when the violation happened, what she’s relying on to make her decision.”

The governor should have corrected her error as soon as it became clear that their imprisonment was unlawful.

– Malori Maloney, attorney with Oregon Justice Resource Center

Yanked back to prison

Beck’s trip to prison – and back again illegally – started in August 2019, when he was convicted in a felony aggravated theft case in Clackamas County.

He was sentenced to 36 months in prison and 24 months of post-prison supervision – five years total.

In February 2021, Brown commuted the last 11 months of his prison sentence and converted that portion to supervision. That meant Beck had 35 months of supervision after prison and he was scheduled to complete that in January 2024.

In June 2023, Beck was charged with assault in Marion County. A judge allowed him to remain free while that case proceeded, and he checked in regularly with his probation officer. By then, Beck was working full-time as a recreational vehicle mechanic in Dallas.

With the case pending and a notification from the Clackamas County District Attorney’s Office, Kotek revoked his commutation. She ordered him back to prison in November 2023.

Beck said he could tell something was off when he checked in with his parole and probation office for his routine monthly visit. First, his supervising officer asked him to verify his contact information.

“After he verified everything, another parole officer bombarded into the office, slammed me against the desk, and they just started telling me, ‘Don’t resist,’” Beck said in an interview with the Capital Chronicle.

Officials told him his commuted sentence was revoked but had little to share beyond that.

“He said, ‘I don’t have any further information. It’s out of my hands,’” Beck said.

At the time, Beck was about two months away from completing his post-prison supervision – and the entirety of his five-year sentence. For about two weeks, Beck sat in the Polk County jail, struggling to get answers from anyone.

“Finally on day 14, they just came and rolled me up and said, ‘You’re going back to prison,’” Beck said. “I was dumbfounded.”

At the time, Beck had not been convicted in the Marion County case. In December, while in prison, Beck pleaded to the assault charge in Marion County, a misdemeanor that required just 17 days in jail with credit for time served.

But for Beck, the stay in prison would last much longer. First, he went to Coffee Creek Correctional Facility in Wilsonville, a women’s prison and intake center for new inmates.

For several months, he stayed in Oregon State Penitentiary in Salem before he was transferred to Columbia River Correctional Institution, a minimum-security prison in Portland.

Beck persisted in his quest for answers.

“I never stopped trying to get information,” he said. “I asked every counselor I had interactions with why I was being returned to prison, what was going on.”

Beck said he was unsatisfied with vague answers.

In January, his original five-year sentence was due to end. But with Kotek’s order, he was expected to spend 11 months in prison. That pushed his projected release to October, effectively extending his original sentence.

By July, attorneys with the Oregon Justice Resource Center took on his case, filing a petition with the Oregon Supreme Court that alleged Kotek illegally revoked his commutation and denied him due process without a hearing, all while extending his original sentence.

The Oregon Supreme Court declined to take on the case, though two justices dissented. The center filed another petition in the Multnomah County Circuit Court, securing his release. Greenlick, in his ruling, also found that Beck should not serve any supervised release after prison.

Nobody thought I was gonna win. They were making fun of me for how hard I was trying.

– Loran Beck, formerly incarcerated Oregonian

Life in prison

Beck’s return to prison was overwhelming as he was yanked from the new life he started.

“My life was completely rebuilt,” he said. “I had completely reinvented myself when it comes to my profession. I came out, I wanted to start a new life for myself and I became an RV technician. And I finally found work that I really love to do.”

As the months wore on, he persisted through uncertainty about his incarceration and the Oregon Supreme Court turning down his first petition.

His fellow inmates doubted his case.

“Nobody thought I was gonna win,” he said. “They were making fun of me for how hard I was trying.”

They would later cheer him on as he packed up to leave.

Beck got his good news while seated in a viewing area of the prison’s law library, as he watched a Zoom connection of the legal proceedings. He had to fight back tears after he heard the judge’s decision.

“I would say it moderately restored my faith in the justice system that, you know, there’s at least somebody willing to look at it, and I’m very grateful for that,” Beck said.

Beck left the law library and told his friends that he won. They gathered around him to shake his hand and congratulate him. Meanwhile, a corrections officer told him to pack up.

“It was like it was a scene straight out of the movies,” he said. “The entire unit erupted into a deafening applause and just yelling. It was amazing. At that moment I realized we really won. Justice was actually served.”

Picking up the pieces

Within four hours, Beck left the prison, wearing a sweatsuit and holding a plastic bag of his belongings.

“They opened the door and said, ‘Have a nice day’ and that was kind of it,’” he said.

And then, just like that, he was walking down the road. Beck said he walked for about 45 minutes before a stranger lent him a cell phone. He called his girlfriend and she picked him up.

Beck is thankful for justice – and the recognition from the courts that he was unfairly treated.

Even so, life in the weeks since his release is not always easy. He lost thousands of dollars worth of tools when he went to prison. His motorcycle was stolen.

He works only part-time and is uncertain what the future holds.

“I just came out to everything being in shambles,” he said.

These days, Beck contemplates whether he should move away from Oregon, the state where he was born, raised and illegally confined in prison.

“I just don’t want to be in the state anymore – just my experiences that they can pull my freedom at any time,” he said. “I just don’t feel safe here. I feel pretty paranoid about it, and I honestly would like to relocate to Arizona or somewhere very, very far away.”

Oregon Capital Chronicle is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Oregon Capital Chronicle maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Lynne Terry for questions: info@oregoncapitalchronicle.com. Follow Oregon Capital Chronicle on Facebook and X.

Oregon GOP-led walkout gridlock deepens as 3 absent senators now banned from new terms

The state Senate impasse deepened on Monday with no Republicans showing up and three senators who’ve participated in the GOP-led walkout now banned from serving new terms.

With the walkout hitting the 10th day, two Republicans – Sens. Daniel Bonham of The Dalles and Dennis Linthicum of Klamath Falls – and Independent Sen. Brian Boquist of Dallas reached 10 unexcused absences, the threshold that prevents them from taking office after the next election. The development gives Senate President Rob Wager, D-Lake Oswego, less leverage to work out a deal with Senate Minority Leader Tim Knopp, R-Bend.

The Senate needed four senators besides the 16 Democrats present on Monday to reach a two-thirds quorum of 20 to conduct business.

Not a single Republican senator was present, all except one unexcused, and they indicated to the Capital Chronicle they intend to continue the boycott. That sentiment follows a three-day weekend that Wagner called for negotiations to try and end the standoff. But those failed, even after Knopp and Wagner met at least five times between Wednesday and Saturday.

On Wednesday, the state will release its revenue forecast, which will determine the shape of the next two-year budget, one of the most important decisions of the session before it ends June 25.

With the Senate unable to meet, the Legislature cannot pass budget bills or other legislation that impacts thousands of Oregonians who need mental health treatment, defense lawyers and housing assistance.

With that work at a standstill, Wagner could do little as he looked across the Senate chamber with nearly half its seats empty.

Instead of running a meeting with votes on bills, Wagner reflected on past walkouts that have dominated the Legislature and brought work to a standstill. The 2020 short session ended March 5 with few bills passed.

At the time, then-Democratic Senate President Peter Courtney predicted that a constitutional amendment would be necessary to prevent walkouts.

That happened in 2022, when Oregon voters supported a constitutional amendment that disqualifies legislators from another term of office if they have 10 or more unexcused absences.

“For those who want to come back and participate in our democracy, we welcome you back wholeheartedly to continue our work together,” Wagner said. “The people of Oregon are counting on us.”

He was unavailable to answer questions afterwards.

Senate Majority Leader Kate Lieber, D-Beaverton, said in a statement she’s saddened by the situation.

“These senators should be here doing their jobs and standing up for their constituents instead of violating the Constitution,” Lieber said. “Democrats are here. We are doing our jobs, and we are confident that we can still deliver on the people’s priorities.”

Earlier in the day, dozens of supporters of the boycott gathered on the Capitol steps and lined the street to voice their opposition to House Bill 2002, an abortion and gender-affirming health care bill that Republicans oppose.

They held anti-abortion signs that called for the protection of children and criticized Democrats. At the urging of one speaker, Pastor Lew Wooten of The River Church in Salem, they sang about Jesus and bowed their heads in prayer.

‘Extreme, unlawful’ agenda

Republican senators appear to be more determined than ever to continue the boycott.

“I conveyed in discussions over the weekend that Senate Republicans will end their protest to pass substantially bipartisan budgets and bills that are lawful and constitutional and that will benefit all Oregonians,” Knopp said in a statement. “Democrats are instead using their slim majority to justify moving forward with an extreme, unlawful, and unconstitutional agenda.”

The GOP senators have said the Senate is not following a state law that requires bill summaries be readable and written at an eighth-grade reading level so the public can understand them. Republicans also are strongly opposed to proposals that include House Bill 2005, which would ban untraceable guns, raise the minimum age from 18 to 21 to purchase assault rifles and allow local agencies to ban firearms on government-owned property, and to House Bill 2002.

Republicans are opposed to House Bill 2002 in part because it allows minors of any age to obtain an abortion without parental notification. Currently, the law allows that for girls 15 and older.

“If Democrats thought we would facilitate an agenda that intentionally removes the rights of parents, they were seriously mistaken. Democrats have gone too far,” Bonham, the deputy minority leader said in a statement.

Bonham told the Capital Chronicle he has no regrets about his decision to reach the 10-absence threshold.

“I would do it again in a heartbeat,” he said. “For me personally, if that bill’s on the table, I want nothing to do with providing any part of facilitating the process that leads to that becoming law.”

Boquist, another senator with 10 unexcused absences, blasted Democrats in an interview with the Capital Chronicle.

“Despite making speeches and talking to the press about being at the table, every discussion that’s been had since the beginning of the session has been: ‘Well, it’s our way or the highway and we’re not interested in anything else,’” Boquist said.

‘Hostile work environment’

Another Republican senator, Cedric Hayden of Fall Creek asked to be excused on Monday because of the “hostile work environment” in the Legislature. He also said he was discriminated against when Wagner would not approve previous requests to be absent for his religious observance and for family medical leave.

“The Senate president has refused to respect my religious freedoms,” Hayden wrote in Monday’s request, which was obtained by the Capital Chronicle.

Wagner denied the request. Hayden has filed a complaint against Wagner that is pending in the Senate.

Wagner’s spokesman declined to comment on the case.

Oregon Capital Chronicle is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Oregon Capital Chronicle maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Lynne Terry for questions: info@oregoncapitalchronicle.com. Follow Oregon Capital Chronicle on Facebook and Twitter.

Oregon judge’s order allows gun sales without completed background checks

A Harney County Circuit Court decision allows Oregonians to continue to buy firearms before completing a background check.

Harney County Judge Robert Raschio issued his decision on Tuesday, preventing the state from enacting a background check requirement for firearm purchases. It is part of Measure 114, a law Oregon voters passed in November that is being litigated in Raschio’s court.

His decision is part of a wider temporary restraining order that prevents other parts of Measure 114 from going into effect while the lawsuit is pending. Measure 114 would enact a new permit system for people who want to purchase firearms that includes a required safety training course and certified instructors.

The decision maintains the status quo for Oregon’s firearm permit system, which allows gun dealers to sell firearms to buyers when Oregon State Police have not completed a background check within three days. Critics of the existing system call it the “Charleston loophole” because it allowed the perpetrator in a 2015 mass shooting in Charleston to obtain a firearm despite having a criminal record. In that shooting, nine people died in a church.

“Judge Raschio’s ruling puts the demands of the gun lobby ahead of public safety and the express will of Oregon voters,” Adam Smith, spokesperson for the Oregon Alliance for Gun Safety, said in a statement.

Measure 114 is intended to enhance gun safety in Oregon and make mass shootings more difficult. But opponents of the measure, including some rural sheriffs, argue that it infringes the constitutional right to bear arms and would require scarce law enforcement resources to run the permit system.

Since the law was passed, firearm purchases have soared, gun shop owners say, creating an even longer backlog of background check requests. Oregon State Police did not respond to a request for details on Tuesday.

The judge wrote in his decision that the background checks and permit system in the new law are intertwined and the “court has made no final determination on the constitutionality of the program.”

The court will address the question of whether the background check requirements of the new law can remain in place only if it determines that the permit system is unconstitutional, Raschio wrote.

The Harney County lawsuit was filed against the state by Gun Owners of America, based in Virginia, and a related organization, the Gun Owners Foundation. Other plaintiffs include Joseph Arnold and Cliff Asmussen, two Harney County firearms owners. Gun Owners of America says on its website it has more than 2 million members and lobbies for firearms owners to exercise the “right to keep and bear arms without compromise.”

A spokesperson for the plaintiffs didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Other parts of the measure are on hold as the case proceeds. Those include a ban on the sale of high-capacity firearm magazines with more than 10 rounds and the permit system.

Kristina Edmunson, a spokesperson for the Oregon Department of Justice, said the state plans to appeal Tuesday’s ruling to the Oregon Supreme Court.

Backlog of applications

The passage of Measure 114 has led to a rush to purchase firearms amid fears the state will not have a system in place to process permit applications. In November, the Oregon State Police Firearms Instant Check System Program, which conducts the background checks, received 85,000 requests for background checks, court records show. That’s more than three times the 25,000 average requests each month the state received through October.

The state has a backlog of unfinished background checks. About 40% of requests can be completed within minutes, but the remaining 60% cannot be processed automatically because of potential matches to a criminal history or incomplete information, the Oregon Department of Justice said in a Dec. 22 memorandum filed in the case.

That memorandum said about 37,000 permit applications need staff review and state staff are reviewing background checks requested 34 days ago. In 2019 and earlier, there was no backlog. State police staff cleared all pending requests each day, the memo said.

Oregon State Police spokespeople didn’t respond Tuesday to a request for updated figures.

Since 2018, the state’s background check system has prevented more than 4,600 felons and more than 2,000 people on probation from illegally buying firearms, the memo said.

A federal court is handling a separate suit against Measure 114. In a ruling on that case earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut said Oregon can postpone the permit requirements after the state asked for a delay so it can set up a system. But Immergut ruled that other parts of the measure, including the ban on sales of high-capacity magazines with more than 10 rounds, can go into effect as scheduled on Dec. 8.

The Harney County judge’s order took precedence over the federal order, though. The Oregon Supreme Court declined to intervene at the request of Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum and the Oregon Department of Justice.

State officials have asked the federal court to give the state until March 7 to prepare a permit system. The Harney County judge has said he’ll have a hearing from both sides when the state’s permit system is ready.

Oregon Capital Chronicle is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Oregon Capital Chronicle maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Lynne Terry for questions: info@oregoncapitalchronicle.com. Follow Oregon Capital Chronicle on Facebook and Twitter.