Or. Admin. Code § 291-105-0072 - Deviation Sanctions for Major Violations
(1) Once the level of discipline has been
determined according to the disciplinary grid, the Hearings Officer or
functional unit manager or designee may deviate, either upward or downward, on
major violations in formal hearings. This deviation of disciplinary segregation
sanction, under no circumstances, may exceed 50 percent of the segregation
sanction in the appropriate box on the grid. All deviated sanctions shall be
supported by written substantial reasons outlining the mitigating or
aggravating factors which support the deviation of disciplinary segregation
sanction. All deviations of disciplinary segregation sanction shall be subject
to review by the functional unit manager or designee.
(2) There may be only one deviation of
disciplinary segregation sanction ordered for each sanction imposed. The
Hearings Officer and functional unit manager or designee may not both order a
separate deviation of disciplinary segregation sanction for one
violation.
(3) Deviations of
disciplinary segregation sanction may only be ordered for major
violations.
(4) Substantial reasons
will be separated into mitigating and aggravating factors.
(5) The following list of mitigating and
aggravating factors may be considered when determining substantial reasons for
a deviation of disciplinary segregation sanction. Other factors not listed may
also constitute substantial reasons for mitigation or aggravation.
(a) Mitigating factors:
(A) The AIC acted under duress or compulsion
(not sufficient as a complete defense).
(B) The AIC's mental capacity was diminished
(excluding diminished capacity due to voluntary drug or alcohol
abuse).
(C) The misconduct was
principally accomplished by another, and the AIC exhibited extreme caution or
concern for the victim.
(D) The
victim (if any) was an aggressor or participant in the behavior associated with
the misconduct.
(E) The AIC played
a minor or passive role in the misconduct.
(F) The AIC cooperated with the department
with respect to the current misconduct or any other misconduct by the AIC or
other AICs.
(G) The degree of harm
or loss attributed to the current misconduct was significantly less than
typical for such misconduct.
(b) Aggravating factors:
(A) Threat of or actual violence toward a
witness or victim.
(B) Persistent
involvement in similar misconduct or repetitive assaults.
(C) Use of a weapon in the commission of the
misconduct.
(D) Deliberate cruelty
to victim.
(E) The AIC knew, or had
reason to know, of the victim's particular vulnerability, such as, the age,
disability, or ill health of victim, which increased the harm or threat of harm
caused by the misconduct.
(F) The
misconduct involved multiple victims or incidents.
(G) The misconduct was part of an organized
operation.
(H) The misconduct
resulted in a permanent injury to the victim.
(I) The degree of harm or loss attributed to
the current violation was significantly greater than typical for such
misconduct.
(J) The misconduct was
motivated entirely, or in part, by the race, sex, color, religion, ethnicity,
or national origin of the victim.
(K) The timing and location of the misconduct
directly threatened the safety, security, or orderly operation of the facility
significantly more than typical for such misconduct.
(c) No aspect of the misconduct that serves
as a necessary element of misconduct may be used as an aggravating factor if
that aspect is also used to impose discipline.
Notes
Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 179.040, 421.180, 423.020, 423.030 & 423.075
Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 179.040, 421.180, 423.020, 423.030 & 423.075
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.