NCJ Number
47952
Date Published
1978
Length
9 pages
Annotation
THE NATURE OF THE TYPICAL PAROLE BOARD HEARING IS DISCUSSED.
Abstract
THE DIALOGUE TYPICAL OF PAROLE PROCEEDINGS USUALLY CENTERS ON THREE ASPECTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL OFFENDER: THE PRISON RECORD, PAROLE PLANS, AND THE OFFENSE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INCARCERATION. PAROLE BOARD MEMBERS USUALLY REFER TO THE INMATE'S FILE DURING THE HEARING AND DISCUSS DISCIPLINARY INFRACTIONS, ASSIGNED DUTIES, AND TRAINING. REGARDING POSTPAROLE PLANS, BOARD MEMBERS GENERALLY ASK THE INMATE TO TALK ABOUT JOB PROSPECTS AND LIVING ARRANGEMENTS, EVEN THOUGH THIS INFORMATION IS DETAILED IN REPORTS ALREADY AVAILABLE TO THE BOARD. A RECENT SURVEY OF 50 BOARDS SHOWED THAT 38 OF THEM REQUIRE THAT AN OFFENDER HAVE A JOB OR OTHER RESOURCES WHICH COULD INCLUDE A PLACE TO STAY UNTIL HE OR SHE CAN FIND A JOB, A SOCIAL SECURITY CHECK, PERSONAL FINANCIAL RESOURCES, OR A TRAINING SLOT. OFTEN THE BOARD RETRIES THE ORIGINAL OFFENSE. THE PRISONER MAY BE INTERROGATED IN SOME DETAIL ABOUT THE FACTS OF THE CRIME. THE MANNER OF THE BOARD MAY BE FIRM AND OBJECTIVE, OR STERNLY PROSECUTORIAL, OR EVEN MORBIDLY INTERESTED. IN CASES WHERE THE OFFENDER PREVIOUSLY ENGAGED IN PLEA BARGAINING, THE BOARD OFTEN ASSUMES GUILT ON THE ORIGINAL CHARGE. BOARD MEMBERS ALSO SOMETIMES USE THE OCCASION OF THE HEARING TO ENGAGE IN COUNSELING EFFORTS, SOME OF WHICH ARE DECIDEDLY INEXPERT AND UNHELPFUL. AS BRIEF AND INFORMAL AS THE HEARINGS ARE, THERE MUST STILL BE SOME PROCEDURAL PROTECTION OF THE PAROLEE'S RIGHTS. DUE PROCESS IN THE USUAL MEANING OF THE TERM DOES NOT YET APPLY TO RELEASE HEARINGS, BUT SOME STATES HAVE TAKEN MODEST STEPS IN THAT DIRECTION. A SURVEY IN 1972 SHOWED THAT 21 BOARDS ALLOWED INMATES TO HAVE COUNSEL PRESENT BUT THAT THE PRISONERS RARELY DID SO BECAUSE THEY WERE UNABLE TO PAY ATTORNEY FEES. PRISON CASEWORKERS PRESENT DURING THE HEARING MAY BE CALLED UPON TO SOLVE PROBLEMS REGARDING ELIGIBILITY DATES, CLARIFY SOME DISCUSSION OF A TRAINING ASSIGNMENT, OR SUPPLY OTHER INFORMATION AS NEEDED BY THE BOARD. CASEWORKERS ALSO SOMETIMES OFFER THEIR OWN JUDGMENTS ABOUT AN INMATE'S READINESS FOR RELEASE. ALTHOUGH BOARD MEMBERS DO NOT QUESTION THE NEED FOR SUCH HEARINGS, A STRONG CASE CAN SOMETIMES BE MADE FOR THEIR ABOLITION. IN A CASE WHERE INFORMATION IN THE FILE AND THE BOARD'S OWN PRECEDENTS PLAINLY SHOW THAT PAROLE MUST SURELY BE GRANTED OR DENIED, THE HEARING IS A CHARADE. HEARINGS CAN HAVE TRAUMATIC EFFECTS ON THE INMATE AS WELL. (KBL)