The Oregon Supreme Court issued an emergency order Monday directing the immediate release of Michael Andrew McEwen from Coffee Creek Correctional Facility, finding his continued imprisonment illegal under a habeas corpus petition.
In a brief but decisive ruling in *McEwen v. Thrasher*, the state high court ordered that McEwen "immediately be discharged from his illegal imprisonment." The court further directed that the State Court Administrator issue the appellate judgment immediately, bypassing standard procedural delays.
McEwen was originally sentenced in 2024 to a total term of 49 months incarceration across two separate cases. The sentences consisted of 23 months in one case and 26 months in another case, to be served consecutively. Both judgments included provisions allowing McEwen to receive credit for time served and pre-sentence incarceration credits under Oregon Revised Statutes 137.370(4).
The case appears connected to the Oregon Supreme Court's recent decisions regarding credit calculations for time served. In 2025, the court issued *State ex rel Torres-Lopez v. Fahrion*, which addressed the proper calculation of credit for time served under ORS 137.370(4). The court later adhered to that decision as modified on reconsideration in a second *Torres-Lopez* ruling.
While the court's order does not elaborate on the specific legal basis for finding McEwen's imprisonment illegal, the reference to the *Torres-Lopez* decisions suggests the case may involve incorrect calculation of pre-sentence credits or time served.
The habeas corpus petition was filed by attorney Thaddeus August Betz of the Oregon Justice Resource Center in Portland. The Justice Resource Center is a nonprofit organization that provides legal representation to individuals in the criminal justice system, particularly those facing post-conviction issues.
Defendant Charlotte Thrasher, the superintendent of Coffee Creek Correctional Facility, was represented by Solicitor General Paul L. Smith and Attorney General Dan Rayfield. Coffee Creek Correctional Facility is Oregon's only women's prison, though it also houses some male inmates in certain circumstances.
The case was designated as an "en banc" proceeding, meaning the full Oregon Supreme Court heard the matter rather than a panel of justices. This designation typically indicates the case involves issues of particular importance or complexity. The matter was submitted on the record January 21, 2026, just six days before the court issued its order.
Habeas corpus petitions allow individuals to challenge the legality of their detention or imprisonment. The writ of habeas corpus, often called the "great writ," serves as a crucial protection against unlawful detention and requires the government to justify continued imprisonment.
The court's use of emergency procedures to expedite the judgment reflects the urgency typically associated with habeas corpus matters. By invoking Oregon Rules of Appellate Procedure 1.20(5) and suspending standard timing requirements under ORAP 9.25 and ORAP 14.05(3)(b), the court ensured McEwen's immediate release rather than requiring him to wait for standard procedural timelines.
The brevity of the court's order, spanning less than three pages, is unusual for Oregon Supreme Court decisions, which typically include detailed legal analysis. However, habeas corpus orders often focus on immediate relief rather than extensive legal reasoning, particularly when the illegality of detention is clear.
The case highlights ongoing issues in Oregon's criminal justice system regarding proper calculation of sentencing credits. The *Torres-Lopez* decisions from 2025 appear to have clarified legal standards that may have affected numerous cases involving pre-sentence incarceration credits.
Oregon's prison system has faced various challenges in recent years, including overcrowding and administrative issues. Proper calculation of sentencing credits is essential to ensure individuals are not held beyond their legal sentences.
The immediate nature of the court's order suggests McEwen may have already served more time than legally required under his sentences when properly calculated with appropriate credits. Such situations can arise when administrative errors occur in calculating complex sentencing provisions.
The Oregon Justice Resource Center's involvement indicates this case may be part of broader efforts to address systemic issues in sentencing credit calculations. The organization frequently handles post-conviction matters involving individuals who may be serving sentences longer than legally required.
The case serves as a reminder of the continuing importance of habeas corpus protections in ensuring individuals are not unlawfully detained. The Oregon Supreme Court's swift action demonstrates the judiciary's role in providing immediate relief when imprisonment lacks legal justification.
While the specific circumstances leading to the determination of illegal imprisonment remain unclear from the brief order, the court's decisive action ensures McEwen's immediate freedom while highlighting the ongoing evolution of sentencing credit law in Oregon.