Judge OKs TX Parole Official Liability for Denying Sex Offender Rights

In another rebuke of Texas policies for classifying parolees as sex offenders, a federal judge has ruled that top state parole officials can be held personally liable for continuing missteps, reports the Austin American-Statesman. U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel blasted the state's continuing refusal to provide due process hearings before imposing restrictive sex-offender conditions on felons never convicted of a sex crime.

Yeakel said the seven-member state Board of Pardons and Paroles, 12 parole commissioners, state parole director Stuart Jenkins, and other officials can face monetary damages for their actions. It's a significant determination that could prove costly for both the officials and taxpayers, if several pending inmate lawsuits are successful. A jury verdict in another case two years ago cost the state approximately $80,000. Yeakel's order — the latest ruling to indicate that federal courts have lost their patience with the state — came in a suit filed by parolee Buddy Jene Yeary. Last fall, the judge blocked the state from enforcing the sex offender restrictions — officially known as Special Condition X — on Yeary, an unusual step for a judge.

Texas Parole Rates Reach New Highs In Effort To Increase Supervision

Texas' parole rate for convicted felons has reached new highs, with the approval rate topping 40 percent this spring after hovering in the high 20s...

LA Times: Rent Subsidies for Homeless Ex-Convicts 'Worth the Risks'

‘A Killer’s Journey Across the American Divide’

By Lisa Riordan Seville

Seattle Times reporters explore the background to a tragic 2009 shooting in Washington state—and its impact on the clemency process—in an award-winning book

Charles Manson, 77, Up for Parole Again, Unlikely to Get It

Charles Manson, who will go before the California parole board for the 12th time next week, has not been a model prisoner, says the Los Angeles Times. Twice the the last few years, guards at Corcoran State Prison found phones in the notorious killer's possession. Manson called people in California, New Jersey, and Florida with an LG flip phone found under his prison bunk in 2009. A second cellphone was found a year later. Thirty days were added to his sentence for the first offense. Earlier, a homemade weapon was found in his possession. A parole board will consider Wednesday whether Manson should be released from prison, though the chances of that happening are pretty slim. The board has rejected parole for Manson 11 times before.

Manson, now 77, refused to participate in his last parole hearing, in 2007, describing himself as a "prisoner of the political system." He also declined to participate in any psychological evaluations that were part of that process. A prison spokeswoman told the Associated Press that Manson has informed local prison officials that he will not be at next week's hearing. The Los Angeles County district attorney's office said it would vigorously oppose Manson's release. "We consistently [opposed parole] and will continue to do so," spokeswoman Sandi Gibbons said.

Can Arkansas Bar Sex Offenders on Parole From the Internet?

Arkansas' parole board wants to bar convicted sex offenders under parole supervision from using the Internet. The board postponed a vote while the state Attorney General studies whether the idea is constitutional, reports the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Kim Knoll of the Department of Community Correction said offenders frequently use the Internet to download child pornography and communicate with children.

Under the proposal, all sex offenders would initially be barred from accessing the Internet, but they could request permission to use it for a specific purpose, such as for work. The Association of Paroling Authorities International is surveying states on their policies. Criminal-defense attorney Jeff Rosenzweig of Little Rock called the proposal "ill-considered, particularly since so much of life and commerce and everything else like that has gone to the Internet." In Louisiana, a federal judge ruled unconstitutional a law prohibiting certain types of sex offenders from using social networking sites, chat rooms, and peer-to-peer networks.

Shakeup and Headline Murder Create Bottleneck in MA Parole Process

Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick’s revamped Parole Board has voted since last April to grant early release to 17 serious criminal offenders, most of them probably convicted murderers, but the panel has not notified any of the inmates - or the families of their victims - that they are on the path to freedom, reports the Boston Globe. The delay in processing applications for parole by so-called lifers - inmates serving sentences of 15 years to life - is part of a broader backlog that has built up at the Parole Board since a paroled lifer fatally shot a Woburn police officer, triggering a shake-up at the agency.

The Parole Board also has failed to notify more than 100 lifers that their requests for parole over the last year have been rejected.Prisoner advocates say the delays, coupled with stricter standards for releasing other inmates on parole, have contributed heavily to a 58 percent drop in the number of inmates who are released under parole supervision, from 1,028 in 2010 to 435 in 2011. “The total effect is more people in prison overall, and fewer people released under supervision,’’ said James R. Pingeon of Prisoners’ Legal Services, a group that provides representation to inmates. “It’s doubly bad.’’ The Parole Board chairman, Josh Wall, defends his agency’s performance, arguing that the new board is simply being more careful while coping with a shortage of resources.

WA Considering Statewide "Swift and Certain" Parolee System

In an experiment, 35 Seattle parolees, were put under a new kind of supervision. Every time they failed a drug test or blew off a meeting with a corrections officer, they’d quickly be jailed, reports the Associated Press. After no more than three days, they’d be released. More serious offenses would result in up to 30 days in jail. Another 35 ex-cons were the control group. Their would be dealt with less consistently, with offenses resulting in anything from a verbal reprimand to 60 days behind bars.

After six months, the parolees subject to the experimental “swift and certain” system of punishment showed dramatically lower rates of drug use. They also were less likely to be sent back to prison. “I went into it with some skepticism. How could something so simple work?” said corrections administrator Donta Harper. “But it worked.” The pilot project is being proposed for a statewide remaking of probation and parole – collectively known as community custody – that would put Washington at the forefront of a nationwide push to change how they function. The system is modeled on a program started 8 years ago in Hawaii and called HOPE--Hawaii Opportunity Probation with Enforcement.

AL High Court Consensus On Juvenile Life Without Parole Terms

Arguments over the constitutionality of a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole for juveniles provoked strong comments but no clear...

On the Docket: Juvenile Life Without Parole

By Matthew T. Mangino

The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing cases on the issue of life without parole for juveniles. Commentator Matthew Mangino says that if recent trends are any indication, the court will restrict the use of life without parole for juveniles, but will not eliminate the practice.

What’s In a Name? A Lot, When the Name is “Felon”

By Margaret Colgate Love

“Felon” is an ugly label that confirms the debased status that accompanies conviction, says former pardon attorney Margaret Love. It identifies a person as belonging to a class outside many protections of the law, someone who can be freely discriminated against, someone who exists at the margins of society. 

Will Supreme Court Strike Down Teen Life Without Parole Sentences?

Next week, the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments on whether mandatory life sentences are too cruel for juveniles. In the first of a 5-part series, MLive Media...

Survey of Teens Serving Life Without Parole Finds Racial Disparities

A survey by the Sentencing Project of 1,579 inmates serving life sentences in prison without the possibility of parole for crimes committed as juveniles found "high rates of socioeconomic disadvantage [and] extreme racial disparities in the imposition of these punishments." The survey said nearly half had experienced physical abuse as youths and 79 percent witnessed violence in their homes. Fewer than half were attending school at the time of their offense, and nearly 85 percent had had been suspended or expelled from school at some point in their academic career. The proportion of African Americans serving life sentences for the killing of a white person is nearly twice the rate at which African American juveniles are arrested for taking a white person’s life.

The survey found that about 62 percent of juvenile lifers are not engaged in programming in prison. This is generally not due to their lack of interest, but because of state or prison policies. Among the juvenile lifers who were not participating in programming, 32.7 percent were prohibited because they will never be released; an additional 28.9 percent were in prisons without sufficient programming or had completed all available programming. The survey said that, "Many juvenile lifers are engaged in constructive change during their incarceration when they are permitted the opportunity to do so."

High Court, CA Legislature Offers Some Hope for Teen Murderers

At least 2,500 inmates nationwide who were convicted of murder as juveniles have been sent to prison with no chance of parole. The Los Angeles Times say that the U.S. Supreme Court and California legislators may give some of these inmates another chance. The court will hear arguments March 20 in two cases involving 14-year-olds, on whether it is unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment to put young juvenile murderers in prison without hope of release.

In Sacramento, a state Senate-passed bill to make juvenile murderers eligible for parole fell two votes short in the Assembly last year but is up for reconsideration this week. In the Supreme Court, attorneys for the 14-year-olds point to forensic evidence that a teenager's brain is not fully developed and that youths consequently take too many risks. Laurence Steinberg, a psychology professor at Temple University, says, "Adolescents, because of their immaturity, should not be deemed as culpable as adults.  But they also are not innocent children whose crimes should be excused." Even if these inmates win in Washington or California, it does not mean they will all be released. They would have to prove to judges and parole boards that they deserve to go home, probably after they have served 25 years. They would need to show near-unblemished prison records, true remorse and proof they can function in society.

Texas Rate of Medical Paroles Dropping Despite Calls to Save Money

Despite calls to save money by releasing seriously ill and aging inmates, Texas’ parole board approves only a small portion of eligible prisoners, and  the approval rate for this fiscal year is lower than usual, reports the Dallas Morning News. Inmate advocates and some fiscal conservatives cite cost savings as a reason to expand inmate medical releases. Parole board members and prosecutors say they concentrate on public safety, not cost. “We’re looking to see if that person, considering their medical condition, if they are a threat to society,” said Rissie Owens, chairwoman of the Board of Pardons and Paroles.

Board members don’t know a prisoner’s medical care costs when making their decisions, she said. Along with the nature of the inmate’s crimes and ability for future criminal activity, the board looks at things like the prisoner’s degree of mobility, assistance needed for daily living, cognitive condition, and estimated life expectancy, Owens said. Prison officials and others couldn’t say why the rate of release approvals has dipped this year. Inmates who are terminally or seriously ill, who need long-term care or who are elderly, physically handicapped, mentally ill or mentally disabled may be eligible for the parole, technically called “medically recommended intensive supervision.” Prisoners who committed certain high-level crimes cannot be considered.