NCJ Number
7474
Journal
Criminal Law Bulletin Volume: 8 Issue: 8 Dated: (OCTOBER 1972) Pages: 651-680
Date Published
1972
Length
30 pages
Annotation
A SURVEY, OF PAROLE BOARDS IN THE US WITH JURISDICTION OVER ADULT OFFENDERS, TO DETERMINE THEIR EXISTING PRACTICES FOR GUARANTEEING DUE PROCESS RIGHTS.
Abstract
A QUESTIONNAIRE WAS MAILED TO THE FIFTY ADULT PAROLE BOARDS FOR THE STATES, THE TWO STATE BOARDS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PAROLE OF WOMEN, AND THE TWO FEDERAL PAROLE AUTHORITIES, THE UNITED STATES BOARD OF PAROLE AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PAROLE BOARD COVERING PROVISION FOR THE PRESENCE OF COUNSEL, PRESENTATION OF WITNESSES, A RECORD, CONFRONTATION OF ADVERSE WITNESSES, DISCLOSURE OF VIOLATION REPORTS, NOTICE, RECORDING OF REASONS FOR THE BOARD'S DECISION, PLACE OF HEARING, AND THE MANNER IN WHICH THE OFFENDER IS INFORMED OF THE DECISION IN HIS CASE. RESPONSES, OBTAINED FROM ALL FIFTY-FOUR JURISDICTIONS, WERE CLASSIFIED AND COMPARED, AND THE RESULTS SUMMARIZED IN STATISTICAL TABLES. THE PRACTICES AT PAROLE REVOCATION HEARINGS WERE PARTICULARLY EMPHASIZED, TO SHOW WHAT CHANGES THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IN MORRISEY V. BREWER, WHICH ESTABLISHED MINIMAL DUE PROCESS STANDARDS FOR SUCH HEARINGS, MANDATED.