PAROLE RESCISSON - WHAT PROCESS IS DUE?

• NCJ Number: 57440
• Journal: PRISON LAW MONITOR Volume: 1 Issue: 2 Dated: (JULY 1978) Pages: 43-47
• Author(s): J L POTTS
• Date Published: 1978
• Length: 5 pages
• Corporate Author: Institution Educational Services, Inc
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

THIS ARTICLE FOCUSES ON RIGHTS OF PRISONERS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO THE INTERMEDIATE STAGE OF THE PAROLE PROCESS WHERE PAROLE IS RESCINDED PRIOR TO RELEASE, BUT OTHER AREAS OF PRISON LAW RELEVANT TO DUE PROCESS ARE NOTED.

Abstract

GENERALLY, THERE ARE THREE STAGES IN THE PAROLE PROCESS. FIRST, WHEN PRISONERS BECOME ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE, A PAROLE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THEIR APPLICATIONS FOR PAROLE. SECOND, MANY JURISDICTIONS HAVE A PROCESS WHEREBY AN UNEXECUTED GRANT OF PAROLE RESULTING FROM AN AFFIRMATIVE DECISION BY A PAROLE BOARD IN CONSIDERING A PRISONER APPLICATION MAY BE RESCINDED. THIRD, ALL JURISDICTIONS PROVIDE THAT PAROLE MAY BE REVOKED AFTER PRISONERS ARE RELEASED IF THEY VIOLATE ANY PAROLE CONDITIONS. AREAS OF PRISON LAW THAT HAVE DEVELOPED AROUND DUE PROCESS QUESTIONS CONCERN PAROLE RELEASE HEARINGS, PAROLE REVOCATION HEARINGS, AND PRISON DISCIPLINARY HEARINGS. THE QUESTION OF WHETHER DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS APPLY TO PAROLE RELEASE HEARINGS HAS NOT BEEN DECIDED BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, ALTHOUGH CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PAROLE REVOCATION HEARINGS ARE CLEAR. DECISIONS OF THE COURT HAVE HELD THAT THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT IMPOSES MINIMUM CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS IN PAROLE REVOCATION PROCEEDINGS AND THAT THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT PRISONERS BE ALLOWED TO CONFRONT ADVERSE WITNESSES AND BE REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL IN PRISON DISCIPLINARY HEARINGS. IN THE INTERMEDIATE STAGE OF THE PAROLE PROCESS WHERE PAROLE IS RESCINDED PRIOR TO RELEASE, JURISDICTIONS ARE DIVIDED ON THE QUESTION OF WHETHER PRISONERS ARE ENTITLED TO PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS WHEN THEY ARE SUBJECT TO PAROLE RESCISSION PROCEEDINGS. THERE ARE THREE BASIC APPROACHES TO THE DUE PROCESS: (1) PAROLE RESCISSION AS AN EXTENSION OF THE INITIAL PAROLE RELEASE DECISION; (2) PAROLE AS SIMILAR TO PAROLE REVOCATION; AND (3) PAROLE RECISSION AS SIMILAR TO THE DISCIPLINARY SANCTION OF FORFEITURE OF GOOD TIME. THE LEADING CASE HOLDING THAT DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS FULLY APPLY TO PAROLE RESCISSION PROCEEDINGS IS WILLIAMS V UNITED STATES BOARD OF PAROLE; THE JUDGE RULED THAT RESCISSON OF THE PRISONER'S PAROLE DATE HAD A CRITICAL IMPACT IN TERMS OF FREEDOM OR INCARCERATION. A DISCUSSION OF LITIGATION IS PRESENTED TO FACILITATE UNDERSTANDING OF THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN PAROLE RESCISSON. CASE LAW IS CITED. (DEP)