78 results for 'cat:"Parole"'.
J. Ortega finds the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision properly declined to “sum and/or unsum” defendant's consecutive prison terms for aggravated murder and first-degree robbery when calculating his projected parole release date. One of defendant's two prison terms is for aggravated murder, so the board lacks authority to “sum” his consecutive prison terms.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Ortega, Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: A177386, Categories: Murder, parole, Sentencing
J. Cetrulo finds that defendant was properly denied an additional hearing for parole from the 99-year sentence imposed upon his 1987 murder conviction because his prior parole request had been denied, and he had been directed to serve the remainder of his sentence, rendering him ineligible for future parole under KRS 439.3403(2)(b). Affirmed.
Court: Kentucky Court Of Appeals, Judge: Cetrulo, Filed On: May 3, 2024, Case #: 2023-CA-0835-MR, Categories: Murder, parole, Sentencing
J. Guerrero denies a petition for review. The trial court imposition of a parole revocation restitution fine was improper since defendant's life sentence for murder did not include the possibility of parole. Also, counsel did not display racial animus by telling him to use street slang, which was valid advice intended to preserve his credibility on the stand. Reversed in part.
Court: California Supreme Court, Judge: Evans, Filed On: May 1, 2024, Case #: A165198, Categories: Murder, parole, Restitution
J. Winokur finds that the circuit court properly denied defendant a writ of mandamus seeking another parole interview and consideration of a reduced sentence for aggravated assault because the commission has discretion to decide when to hold parole interviews, and defendant did not have a legal right to an interview. Affirmed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Winokur, Filed On: May 1, 2024, Case #: 1D2023-0798, Categories: parole, Assault, Due Process
J. Reiber finds that the lower court improperly granted summary judgment to the state in this concurrent sentence for murder and sexual assault against a former convict, who had served the maximum sentence for his sex offense, but remained on parole. The Vermont Supreme Court concludes the summary judgment was inappropriate and remands for further proceedings regarding the unresolved legal and factual questions of the plaintiff’s parole and sex offense. Reversed.
Court: Vermont Supreme Court, Judge: Reiber, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: 22-AP-274, Categories: parole, Sentencing, Sex Offender
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Lee finds that the district court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress in a case in which defendant argued that a police officer violated the Fourth Amendment by asking about parole status during a traffic stop. Asking about parole status during a traffic stop does not offend the Fourth Amendment because the question reasonably relates to the officer’s safety. However, the matter is remanded in part so that the district court can correct the written judgment to conform it to the oral pronouncement of sentence. Affirmed in part.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Lee, Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: 22-50045, Categories: parole, Search, Sentencing
J. Easterbrook finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of being a felon in possession of a firearm after a search of his motel room found bullets that went along with a gun he dropped while fleeing from police. Defendant was on parole at the time he was found in possession of a weapon, and so he did not have an expectation of privacy in his motel room, so the bullets were properly admitted into evidence. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Easterbrook, Filed On: April 12, 2024, Case #: 23-2097, Categories: Firearms, parole, Search
J. Gonzalez finds that the lower court properly granted the petitioner's habeas corpus petition alleging that he was not given a timely hearing after his arrest for violating parole. The Less is More Act plainly requires a speedy adjudication of alleged parole violations within 24 hours, but defendant was held for five days after the execution of the warrant. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Gonzalez, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 01685, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Habeas, parole
J. McBride finds that the lower court properly denied defendant's request for pretrial release on charges of being an armed habitual criminal and unlawful use of a weapon. Defendant had prior convictions for attempted murder and was on parole at the time of his arrest. With this evidence, the state met its burden of providing defendant poses a real threat to the safety of the community. Affirmed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: McBride, Filed On: March 19, 2024, Case #: 232482, Categories: Firearms, parole, Bail
J. Bianco finds that the district court improperly set a special parole condition following defendant's conviction on his guilty plea to possessing cocaine with intent to distribute and possessing a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking. While a defendant can be subjected to random searches by probation officers, the need for such a condition must be sufficiently explained. On remand, rationale for the condition is needed, along with assurances that its imposition involved no greater deprivation of liberty than necessary. Vacated.
Court: 2nd Circuit, Judge: Bianco, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 21-2954, Categories: Drug Offender, parole
J. Gabriel finds that Colorado's sex offender sentencing scheme allows parole boards to consider a juvenile defendant's maturity, although the statutory language does not require such consideration. The term "progress through treatment" does not necessarily include such a defendant's maturation process, which involves a number of factors that must be applied on a case-by-case basis. However, because "progress through treatment" includes sex offender programs that are, by definition, rehabilitative, parole boards must consider rehabilitation as part of their ultimate decisions regarding juvenile sex offenders.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court, Judge: Gabriel, Filed On: March 11, 2024, Case #: 2024CO14, Categories: Juvenile Law, parole, Sex Offender
[Modified.] J. Moor alters one sentence and denies a rehearing with no change in judgment. The trial court should have suppressed the gun police found in a parole search of defendant's car. Before police knew he was on parole, they had unlawfully detained him by positioning their bodies where he could not drive away or open the car doors to walk away. Also, they shined flashlights into the car in a demonstration of authority and required him to stop a phone conversation he was having while legally parked. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Moor, Filed On: March 7, 2024, Case #: B320488, Categories: Firearms, parole, Search
J. Aarons finds that defendant's appeal from the denial of his habeas request should be dismissed as moot. Defendant had absconded in 2015 and remained at large until he was charged with attempted murder in Illinois in 2017, for which he served a six-year sentence before being extradited to New York. Defendant objected to being held without bail pending a parole revocation hearing, but the issue was rendered moot when a revocation hearing occurred and he was returned to prison until 2030. Defendant's valid complaint that he had not been allowed to cross-examine a parole officer was not sufficiently novel to trigger an exception to the mootness doctrine.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Aarons, Filed On: February 29, 2024, Case #: 535304, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Habeas, parole
J. Mooney finds the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision properly declined to reduce defendant’s life sentence for aggravated murder of his wife. The board cited “petitioner’s unwillingness to enter AA or any similar twelve-step recovery program, his continued lack of insight into his crimes and the impact of those crimes on others, and his unwillingness to fully commit to severing his relationship with his daughters.” Affirmed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Mooney, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: A178249, Categories: Murder, parole, Sentencing
J. Rovner finds that the defendant's appeal must be dismissed as moot because he has completed his 70-month sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm and has suffered no injury that can be redressed by a favorable judicial decision.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Rovner, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: 23-2196, Categories: Criminal Procedure, parole
J. Garry finds that the lower court properly dismissed defendant's claim seeking immediate release from prison on grounds that he earned a certificate of eligibility for parole upon graduating from a shock incarceration program because defendant received a prior indeterminate sentence. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Garry, Filed On: February 15, 2024, Case #: CV-23-0351, Categories: parole
J. Readler finds the lower court properly dismissed the released inmate's lawsuit against the parole board members on the grounds of absolute immunity. Their decision to deny an early parole hearing based on changes in Tennessee law involved quasi-judicial authority that bars any suit for damages. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Readler, Filed On: February 15, 2024, Case #: 22-6004, Categories: parole, Due Process
J. Moor holds that the trial court should have suppressed the gun police found in a parole search of defendant's car. Before police knew he was on parole, they had unlawfully detained him by positioning their bodies where he could not drive away or open the car doors to walk away. Also, they shined flashlights into the car in a demonstration of authority and required him to stop a phone conversation he was having while legally parked. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Moor, Filed On: February 14, 2024, Case #: B320488, Categories: Firearms, parole, Search
J. Egan finds that the lower court properly dismissed defendant's request to review a decision denying parole since the parole board weighed the required factors, including the violent nature of his armed standoff with police, which led to conviction for weapon possession and attempted murder. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Egan, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: CV-22-1888, Categories: parole
J. Shorr finds the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision properly accounted for sex-offense-free time in the community in setting defendant’s risk level. Defendant "has failed to develop his argument that the board, upon adopting an actuarial instrument, was prohibited from deviating from that instrument.” Affirmed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Shorr, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: A179828, Categories: parole, Sex Offender
J. Mathias finds that the trial court improperly held defendant in jail for 630 days without holding a hearing on whether he violated parole based on the false idea that he was being held for parole violations and new criminal charges. Defendant was entitled to a determination as to whether his delay was unlawful and whether allegations that he violated parole should be dismissed. Reversed.
Court: Indiana Court Of Appeals, Judge: Mathias, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 23A-MI-1053, Categories: Criminal Procedure, parole
J. Shorr finds the Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision properly accounted for sex-offense-free time in the community in setting defendant’s risk level. Defendant “failed to address the specific language in effect.” Affirmed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Shorr, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: A176473, Categories: parole, Sex Offender
J. Niemeyer finds the lower court properly sentenced the defendant for violating the conditions of his supervised release. The defendant was arrested and convicted under state law on three counts of manufacturing or distributing illegal drugs and sentenced to 13 years imprisonment for those offenses during his supervised release for a previous drug trafficking conviction. Despite the judge referencing some prohibited factors during sentencing, the sentence itself is not unreasonable. Affirmed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Niemeyer , Filed On: January 8, 2024, Case #: 22-4291, Categories: Drug Offender, parole, Sentencing