NCJ Number
32067
Journal
New England Journal on Prison Law Volume: 2 Issue: 1 Dated: (FALL 1975) Pages: 15-26
Date Published
1975
Length
12 pages
Annotation
THE COMBINED EFFECT OF CALIFORNIA'S INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW AND ITS PAROLE REVOCATION PROCEDURES WORKS A GREAT HARDSHIP UPON THE STATE'S PRISONERS.
Abstract
UNDER THE STATE'S INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW, STATE COURTS DO NOT HAVE THE POWER TO FIX THE TERM OF IMPRISONMENT WHEN SENTENCING A PRISONER. THIS POWER IS VESTED IN THE ADULT AUTHORITY, A BRANCH OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. IN ADDITION, THE ADULT AUTHORITY HAS BEEN GRANTED THE POWER TO GRANT PAROLE, TO FIX TERMS OF PAROLE, AND TO SUSPEND, CANCEL, OR REVOKE PAROLE. A PAROLEE NEARING THE COMPLETION OF HIS PREVIOUSLY FIXED PRISON SENTENCE WHO IS SUSPECTED OF VIOLATING ANY OF THE TERMS OF HIS PAROLE, NO MATTER HOW TRIVIAL, CAN HAVE HIS PAROLE SUSPENDED BY THE ADULT AUTHORITY AFTER A PRELIMINARY HEARING. BY RESOLUTION NO. 171, HIS TERM IS REFIXED AT THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FOR THE OFFENSE FOR WHICH HE WAS ORIGINALLY CONVICTED, AND THE ADULT AUTHORITY RETAINS ITS CUSTODY OVER HIM. IF HE IS FOUND GUILTY OF A VIOLATION OF HIS PAROLE AT THE REVOCATION HEARINGS, WITH THEIR MINIMAL DUE PROCESS REQUIREMENTS, HE WILL LIKELY HAVE HIS SENTENCE INCREASED AS A RESULT OF SUCH GUILT. PERSONS NOT PROFESSIONALLY TRAINED IN PENOLOGY SHOULD NOT BE UTILIZED TO CONDUCT THE REVOCATION HEARINGS AND RECOMMEND A COURSE OF ACTION TO THE ADULT AUTHORITY. THE ADULT AUTHORITY ITSELF SHOULD MORE CLOSELY PARTICIPATE IN PAROLE REVOCATION PROCEEDINGS. THE DISCRETION LODGED IN THE ADULT AUTHORITY REGARDING THE RIGHT FOR A PAROLEE TO CONFRONT AND CROSS-EXAMINE HIS ACCUSER AND THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL AT REVOCATION HEARINGS SHOULD BE LIBERALLY EXERCISED IN FAVOR OF THE PAROLEE. EVIDENTIARY REQUIREMENTS COULD BE TIGHTENED UP TO MORE CLOSELY FOLLOW THOSE OF A JUDICIAL PROCEEDING. MOST IMPORTANTLY, HOWEVER, RESOLUTION NO. 171 SHOULD BE REPEALED AS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE SPIRIT OF A PAROLE SYSTEM. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT)