"Mandatory" parole?

[Boyo_Jim]

In this discussion of Johnathan Pollard, I found out Pollard had been sentenced to life in prison. But, according to Wiki at least, when he was sentenced there was a rule in effect “mandating” parole after 30 years have been served. In Pollard’s case that will be in 2015.

My understanding of normal parole is that the prisoner is released before completing the sentence, providing he agrees to follow certain rules of behavior and undergo some kind of ongoing supervision. If the rules are broken, the person is slapped back into prison to serve out the remainder of the sentence.

I have a few questions.

1. Is my understanding of normal parole generally correct?

2. In Pollard’s case, what happens if he refuses to agree to terms of behavior following his release? Do they keep in prison, or let him go and toss him back in as soon as he violates the first rule that he didn’t agree to? Or something else?

3. Just as kind of an aside, what is the difference between probation and parole?

[robert_columbia]

Probation is part of a judicial sentence, i.e. the judge can give you probation. Parole is granted by the parole board, prison system, or other administrative agency that allows you to serve time in the community, notwithstanding the fact that the judge sentenced you to Prison.

I was under the impression that neither probation nor parole was mandatory on the part of the offender, and that the offender can refuse and demand to serve the entire time in prison. I think this is based on the idea that people on probation or parole can be given conditions like going to drug therapy, sex offender treatment classes, or anger management classes that can raise Constitutional questions.

[UltraVires]

From the context of the article, it sounds like it’s mandatory in the sense that the prisoner is entitled, as a matter of right, to be given parole after 30 years provided he follows the rules.

In most situations, the parole board has full discretion and looks at the inmates entire history to determine if he is eligible. It seems that the law as it was in 1987 took the decision away from the parole board after 30 years.

[Boyo_Jim]

The article also stated that he became eligible to apply for parole after 8 years, but he has never applied for it.

[rat_avatar]

Probation is supervision given in lieu of imprisonment, parole is supervision that shortens imprisonment.

In other words probation is what you are on if you never go to prison, parole is what shortens your stay there.

[Chessic_Sense]

@rat_avatar

Probation is supervision given in lieu of imprisonment, parole is supervision that shortens imprisonment.

In other words probation is what you are on if you never go to prison, parole is what shortens your stay there.

Useless nitpick: You’re right that probation is in lieu of imprisonment, but that doesn’t mean you never went to prison. It’s common for small offenses (DUI, shoplifting, domestic assault) to get short prison time and long probations, like 10 days jail and 2 years probation. But as has been stated, that’s all determined by the judge at your trial as part of the sentence, as opposed to a parole board.

[rat_avatar]

@Chessic_Sense

Useless nitpick: You’re right that probation is in lieu of imprisonment, but that doesn’t mean you never went to prison. It’s common for small offenses (DUI, shoplifting, domestic assault) to get short prison time and long probations, like 10 days jail and 2 years probation. But as has been stated, that’s all determined by the judge at your trial as part of the sentence, as opposed to a parole board.

I agree, should have qualified that I was over simplifying.

[doreen]

In many systems (maybe most ) in the US, there comes a time when a prisoner is eligible for a mandatory early release.It doesn’t mean the prisoner must accept release- it means that the release does not depend on the discretion of a parole board It’s usually not called parole - it might be called “post-release supervision”, " conditional release" or in the case of the Feds “supervised release”.

Your understanding of normal parole is essentially correct, but does not include the many forms of supervised release which are not actually traditional parole and are different in each jurisdiction.

[Polycarp]

Key to this whole question is the idea of indeterminate sentences – which place the onus for rehabilitation on the prisoner himself. A typical indeterminate sentence might be:
[ul][li]"?This court sentences you to a term of not less than three nor more than ten years in the state prison system."[/li][li]“This court sentences you to a term of not less than twenty-five years, not to exceed your natural life.”[/li][li]“This court sentences you to a term of not more than five years imprisonment.”[/ul][/li]
A maximum term is always stated (which can be life without parole in especially egregious cases). A mimimum term is at the judge’s discretion.

Using New York State’s process from the early 1970s, when I learned this, as my example, and asking Little Nemo, who has much more recent hands-on experience with the system, for correction, how it works is this:

The convict must serve the minimum sentence before becoming eligible for consideration for parole. (Note that does not say “eligible for parole.”) At the time I learned this, failure to state a minimum equated to a minimum of one-third the maximum. After that minimum sentence has been served, the convict becomes eligible to be considered for parole. The parole reviews his record in prison, his past history, the degree to which he has rehabilitated himself, etc., and determines whether to allow him to try supervised life outside prison. Such reviews are done roughly once every six months per convict. Meanwhile the convict has been behaving himself in prison, hoping for parole, and racking up “good behavior time.” This is time shaved off his imprisonment for behaving himself, staying out of fights, etc., and may be revoked in whole or in part by a disciplinary hearing by the warden. Maximum good behavior time is a third of one’s maximum sentence. If a convict has not been released on parole by the time he has served two-thirds of his maximum sentence, nd has not lost his good behavior time, the onus of proof shifts – rather than the default being continued incarceration, from which the parole board may relieve him, it becomes eligibility for parols, for which good reasons why it should not be granted need to be adduced. In short, he becomes “entitled” (subject to some nuance) to parole after two-thirds of his sentence. He does not need to accept parole if he so chooses (and a few prisoners do so choose) but barring special circumstances it can only be denied him for exceptionally good reasons, otherwise he is entitled to be released. Parole, of course, is not total freedom – typically he may not drink alcoholic beverages, possess a firearm, must find work and then hold a steady job, etc. He must report to his parole officer, who has the right to make unannounced visitations upon him.

“Life without parole” for vicious murders, etc., is simply saying that there is no point at which the convict becomes eligible for consideration for parole – the only way he is leaving prison is in a coffin or by receiving a special act of clemency by the governor.

[Boyo_Jim]

So, it’s possible Pollard will not request parole in 2015, and stay in prison?

Is it also possible he could request parole, and ultimately not agree agree to the terms of parole, and stay in prison? Will he know what the terms of parole are before he makes a request for parole?

And I would assume, should he violate the terms of parole, he will be put back in prison. Correct?

[Boyo_Jim]

Oh, I forgot one. How much discretion does the Federal prison parole board have in setting the terms of parole? Might they be able to “stack the deck” in some manner that makes remaining in prison more attractive than parole?

It’s hard for me to imagine they could, but it’s also hard for me to imagine that he’s been eligible to request parole for around 20 years, and hasn’t done so. I’m guessing that with a mandatory parole, he won’t have to pretend remorse in order to get parole. Perhaps he isn’t interested in putting on a phony act of guilt and remorse for the board.

[doreen]

A couple of minor corrections , Polycarp. In NY if parole is denied, the parole board sets a reappearance date, which can be up to two years. In the case of an indeterminate sentence , after serving two thirds of the maximum , a prisoner who applies is conditionally released by operation of law. The only adjustments to this date are for good time lost as a result of disciplinary hearings. There is no burden of proof- if he was sentenced to one to three years, and hasn’t lost any good time, he must be released after two years and if he lost two months of good time, he must be released after 26 months.

Somewhere around 1994. NY started imposing determinate sentences with post-release supervision, and those work very differently.

[Soliloquy]

Minor correction on the difference between probation and parole: probation is the monitoring system for an offender who is not serving prison time. Parole is the monitoring system for a person actually serving a prison sentence.

[Boyo_Jim]

@doreen

A couple of minor corrections , Polycarp. In NY if parole is denied, the parole board sets a reappearance date, which can be up to two years. In the case of an indeterminate sentence , after serving two thirds of the maximum , a prisoner who applies is conditionally released by operation of law. The only adjustments to this date are for good time lost as a result of disciplinary hearings. There is no burden of proof- if he was sentenced to one to three years, and hasn’t lost any good time, he must be released after two years and if he lost two months of good time, he must be released after 26 months.

Somewhere around 1994. NY started imposing determinate sentences with post-release supervision, and those work very differently.

If someone is released early for good behavior, do they have to submit to some kind ongoing supervision for the remainder of their full sentence?

Also, if someone never receives parole and serves their full sentence, is it correct that there is no further oversight after release?

[doreen]

@Boyo_Jim

If someone is released early for good behavior, do they have to submit to some kind ongoing supervision for the remainder of their full sentence?

Also, if someone never receives parole and serves their full sentence, is it correct that there is no further oversight after release?

If someone is conditionally released, they are supervised for the remainder of the sentence. If someone with an indeterminate sentence is neither paroled nor conditionally released and serves the full sentence, there is no supervision after release,

Determinate sentences are split- they call for a certain period of incarceration and a certain period of post-release supervision. Good time can e earned for up to 1/7 of the sentence. If someone is conditionally released after 6/7 of the sentence, they are then supervised for the term of post- release supervision. Release is essentially automatic - the only way such a person can serve the full sentence is to be released, violate the conditions of supervision and be returned to prison.

[UltraVires]

@Polycarp

Key to this whole question is the idea of indeterminate sentences – which place the onus for rehabilitation on the prisoner himself. A typical indeterminate sentence might be:
[ul][li]"?This court sentences you to a term of not less than three nor more than ten years in the state prison system."[/li][li]“This court sentences you to a term of not less than twenty-five years, not to exceed your natural life.”[/li][li]“This court sentences you to a term of not more than five years imprisonment.”[/ul][/li]
A maximum term is always stated (which can be life without parole in especially egregious cases). A mimimum term is at the judge’s discretion.

Using New York State’s process from the early 1970s, when I learned this, as my example, and asking Little Nemo, who has much more recent hands-on experience with the system, for correction, how it works is this:

The convict must serve the minimum sentence before becoming eligible for consideration for parole. (Note that does not say “eligible for parole.”) At the time I learned this, failure to state a minimum equated to a minimum of one-third the maximum. After that minimum sentence has been served, the convict becomes eligible to be considered for parole. The parole reviews his record in prison, his past history, the degree to which he has rehabilitated himself, etc., and determines whether to allow him to try supervised life outside prison. Such reviews are done roughly once every six months per convict. Meanwhile the convict has been behaving himself in prison, hoping for parole, and racking up “good behavior time.” This is time shaved off his imprisonment for behaving himself, staying out of fights, etc., and may be revoked in whole or in part by a disciplinary hearing by the warden. Maximum good behavior time is a third of one’s maximum sentence. If a convict has not been released on parole by the time he has served two-thirds of his maximum sentence, nd has not lost his good behavior time, the onus of proof shifts – rather than the default being continued incarceration, from which the parole board may relieve him, it becomes eligibility for parols, for which good reasons why it should not be granted need to be adduced. In short, he becomes “entitled” (subject to some nuance) to parole after two-thirds of his sentence. He does not need to accept parole if he so chooses (and a few prisoners do so choose) but barring special circumstances it can only be denied him for exceptionally good reasons, otherwise he is entitled to be released. Parole, of course, is not total freedom – typically he may not drink alcoholic beverages, possess a firearm, must find work and then hold a steady job, etc. He must report to his parole officer, who has the right to make unannounced visitations upon him.

“Life without parole” for vicious murders, etc., is simply saying that there is no point at which the convict becomes eligible for consideration for parole – the only way he is leaving prison is in a coffin or by receiving a special act of clemency by the governor.

At what point is the convict “released” from parole? I get that if he getls a 3 to 10 sentence, he must do at least 3 years before consideration for parole and that at 10 years he is as free as you and I. Can he be released from parole earlier than that?

What about a 25 to life? Is that a mandatory life of parole?

ETA: and how does “good time” factor into a 25 to life sentence?

[doreen]

@jtgain

At what point is the convict “released” from parole? I get that if he getls a 3 to 10 sentence, he must do at least 3 years before consideration for parole and that at 10 years he is as free as you and I. Can he be released from parole earlier than that?

What about a 25 to life? Is that a mandatory life of parole?

ETA: and how does “good time” factor into a 25 to life sentence?

In NY, there are various early discharges which might allow the releasee to be discharged from supervision before the 10 years are up. Some of those discharges are available to those with life sentences. There is no “good time” and no conditional release with a life sentence.

[Paul_in_Qatar]

You know, I really appreciate this thread. I think I now understand the possibility of JP being released under parole.

The government may impose conditions upon his release. These might include (I suppose) things like limits to where he can live, prohibition from him leaving the USA, prohibition from his taking profit from his crime or from donors.

(Right?)

[Boyo_Jim]

Glad to be of service.

[Max_Torque]

Because I like to hear my own voice, here’s the section that eliminates mandatory supervision for some offenses in Texas, with my additional notes in brackets:

Texas Government Code Sec. 508.149. INMATES INELIGIBLE FOR MANDATORY SUPERVISION.
(a) An inmate may not be released to mandatory supervision if the inmate is serving a sentence for or has been previously convicted of:

(1) an offense for which the judgment contains an affirmative finding under Section 3g(a)(2), Article 42.12, Code of Criminal Procedure; [use of a deadly weapon in commission of or flight from an offense]

(2) a first degree felony or a second degree felony under Section 19.02, Penal Code; [murder]

(3) a capital felony under Section 19.03, Penal Code; [capital murder]

(4) a first degree felony or a second degree felony under Section 20.04, Penal Code; [aggravated kidnapping]

(5) an offense under Section 21.11, Penal Code; [indecency with a child]

(6) a felony under Section 22.011, Penal Code; [sexual assault]

(7) a first degree felony or a second degree felony under Section 22.02, Penal Code; [aggravated assault]

(8) a first degree felony under Section 22.021, Penal Code; [aggravated sexual assault]

(9) a first degree felony under Section 22.04, Penal Code; [injury to a child / elderly / disabled person]

(10) a first degree felony under Section 28.02, Penal Code; [arson]

(11) a second degree felony under Section 29.02, Penal Code; [robbery]

(12) a first degree felony under Section 29.03, Penal Code; [aggravated robbery]

(13) a first degree felony under Section 30.02, Penal Code; [burglary of a habitation with intent to commit any felony other than theft]

(14) a felony for which the punishment is increased under Section 481.134 or Section 481.140, Health and Safety Code; [drug-free zones or using a child to commit a drug-related offense]

(15) an offense under Section 43.25, Penal Code; [sexual performance by a child]

(16) an offense under Section 21.02, Penal Code; [continuous sexual abuse of a child] or

(17) a first degree felony under Section 15.03, Penal Code. [criminal solicitation, that is, hiring a hit man]

(b) An inmate may not be released to mandatory supervision if a parole panel determines that:

(1) the inmate’s accrued good conduct time is not an accurate reflection of the inmate’s potential for rehabilitation; and

(2) the inmate’s release would endanger the public.

As luck would have it, I’m responding to a habeas petition from an inmate right now who was convicted of attempted murder. An attempt to commit an offense is punished as one grade lower than the offense attempted. Murder is a first degree felony, so attempted murder is a second degree felony. Therefore, he was convicted of a second degree felony under section 19.02, and is not eligible for mandatory supervision. Sorry, pal.