Criminal,
California Supreme Court
Jan. 29, 2021
Parole is separate from sentence, says high court
“[W]hen parole works as intended, it is a sufficiently vital part of the rehabilitation process that ought not be categorically discarded simply because an inmate establishes that the preceding period of incarceration became constitutionally disproportionate,” wrote Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuellar in the unanimous 24-page opinion.
Although his 10 parole denials kept a convict in prison too long, once granted, parole should not have been terminated on those grounds, as it is a separate issue, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
A state appellate court unjustly terminated parole granted to a man who had been serving an indeterminate life sentence for aggravated robbery based on a finding that the previous routine denial of supervised release over the cours...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In
Enewsletter Sign-up
Related Content
statutory_interpretation
In re Palmer
To the extent petitioner's continued incarceration at some point became constitutionally excessive, that alone did not justify ending his parole under the current statutory scheme.
