NCJ Number
15782
Journal
Rutgers Law Review Volume: 27 Issue: 3 Dated: (SPECIAL ISSUE) Pages: 554-571
Date Published
1974
Length
18 pages
Annotation
EXAMINATION OF THIS STATE SUPREME COURT RULING (BECKWORTH V. STATE BOARD OF PAROLE) AND ITS CONFORMITY WITH MONKS, WHICH HELD THAT AN INMATE DENIED PAROLE RELEASE MUST BE PROVIDED WITH REASONS FOR THE PAROLE BOARD'S ACTIONS.
Abstract
THE STATUTORY REGULATION OF PAROLE RELEASE IN NEW JERSEY IS REVIEWED. FEDERAL AND STATE RESTRAINTS ON PAROLE RELEASE ARE ALSO DISCUSSED. THE PAROLE BOARD'S DECISION TO DENY PAROLE RELEASE IN THE BECKWORTH CASE IS ANALYZED AS TO THE REASONS FOR DENIAL, THE JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE FACT FINDING, AND THE STANDARDS OF PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS. IT IS ARGUED THAT THE COURT'S BLANKET REJECTION OF THE PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS SOUGHT IN BECKWORTH IS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE ANNOUNCED PURPOSES OF MONKS, SINCE ALLOWING MINIMAL DISCLOSURE OF REASONS LIMITS THE COURT'S ABILITY TO REVIEW PAROLE DENIALS FOR ARBITRARINESS. IT, THEREFORE, HAS LITTLE OR NO EFFECT ON THE POTENTIAL FOR UNFAIRNESS IN PAROLE RELEASE DECISIONS.