U.S. Parole Commission
Edward F. Reilly, Jr., Chairman
|
U.S. Parole CommissionEdward F. Reilly, Jr., Chairman |
Shown below is a list of questions that arose during the Commission's public forum held on April 5, 2003. These public forums are held twice a year to provide the citizens of the District of Columbia the chance to ask questions or raise concerns about the policies of the Commission. The questions were raised by attendees invited to address the panel of speakers, which consisted of representatives from the United States Parole Commission, the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency, and the Bureau of Prisons. These questions include only those directed at the Commission.
QUESTION: What is the parole rate for DC offenders compared to federal offenders?
ANSWER: For all cases heard during calendar year 2002, 86% of offenders sentenced out of the District of Columbia Superior Court were granted parole (1,895 parole grants out of 2,214 final decisions). During the same timeframe, 69% of federal offenders heard by the Commission were granted parole (795 parole grants out of 1,144 final decisions). Although cases were granted parole during 2002, they were not necessarily released during that year. Many will not be released until a few years later.
QUESTION: Why is the recommendation of the examiner conducting the hearing reviewed by a second examiner? How often is the recommendation of the examiner conducting the hearing changed by a second examiner?
ANSWER: The examiners have three primary responsibilities: 1) to establish the facts of the case; 2) to calculate the applicable parole guideline to guide the final decision; and 3) to make a recommendation to the Parole Commissioners who make the final decision. The first examiner conducts an in-person hearing to give the parole applicant every opportunity to point out any deficiencies in the factual record and to present any facts in mitigation of the offense or concerning personal history. The second examiner reviews the case after the hearing to ensure that all relevant information is known, that the parole guidelines are calculated correctly, and that the recommendation reflects Commission policy. The use of a second examiner, which has been the policy of the Commission for over 25 years, is viewed as a necessary step to ensure accurate application of Commission policy and to promote sound decision-making. During calendar year 2002, the recommendation of the examiner conducting the hearing for a DC offender was modified by another examiner in 13% of the hearings. In some cases, this may be due to new information and in other cases it may be difference of opinion over an interpretation of the facts or a judgment as to the proper recommendation. It should always be kept in mind, however, that the examiner panel only makes a recommendation and that that the final decision rests solely with the United States Parole Commissioners. However, it is relatively rare that the Commissioners choose to depart from the panel recommendation.
QUESTION: What are the bases for the Parole Commission denying parole? How does the Commission determine that a parole applicant is a risk?
ANSWER: In accordance with DC Code 24-404(a), after an inmate serves the minimum term imposed by the court, he or she is considered to be suitable for parole if there is a reasonable probability that the inmate will remain at liberty after parole without violating the law, and, in the opinion of the Commission, the inmate's release is not incompatible with the welfare of society. To guide the Commission in making these determinations, the Commission applies the guidelines for D.C. Code Offenders as published in the U.S. Parole Commission Rules and Procedures Manual, which can be found at the Commission's website (www.USDOJ.GOV/USPC). Risk of committing a crime after release is measured by the Salient Factor Score, a statistical measure that is backed by thirty years of research. The guidelines also take into account a history of violence on the part of the parole applicant, including violence in the offense of conviction, and conduct in prison.
QUESTION: Is it possible to see a copy of the Salient Factor Score?
ANSWER: The Notice of Action given to the inmate shows each item of the Salient Factor Score as well as the total score. The Salient Factor Score is published in the U.S. Parole Commission Rules and Procedures Manual, which can be found at the Commission's website.
QUESTION: In making parole decisions, is the Commission influenced by the political climate, which appears to be opposed to parole? Does the Commission try to make offenders do 85% of their sentence as required under the law for inmates not eligible for parole?
ANSWER: The Commission is an independent agency within the Department of Justice. Political factors are not involved in the Commission's determination of parole for any offender under its jurisdiction. The Commission zealously guards its independence in making parole decisions and has stoutly resisted the very few times that someone outside the agency has attempted to influence the outcome of a parole hearing. An interesting discussion of this can be found in the book Fear No Man, by George Reed, a former Chairman of the Commission.
QUESTION: Will an offender sentenced under the Youth Rehabilitation Act (YRA) be denied parole if a program plan cannot be completed through no fault of the offender? Is an offender sentenced under YRA guaranteed parole if the program plan is successfully completed?
ANSWER: Institution staff will submit a program plan for a YRA offender at the time of the initial hearing, and the Commission may modify the plan if needed. The Commission will determine parole in accordance with the parole guidelines and on the basis of its judgment as to whether the offender's program participation has reduced the risk that the offender's release would pose to the public. Successful completion of a program plan will be considered by the Commission to determine if the risk posed by the offender to the community is reduced. The Commission will take into consideration the circumstance that an offender was unable to complete the program plan due to no fault of the offender, but the overriding criterion is whether the offender can be safely released without completing the entire program plan. Parole is not guaranteed even if the program plan is successfully completed.
QUESTION: If parole is denied at the initial hearing for an offender convicted of a DC Code offense, how often will the Commission review the status of a case?
ANSWER: At the initial hearing, the Commission can set a parole date up to three years from the date of the hearing. If parole is denied and the prisoner is not released on good time before three years from the date of the hearing, the Commission will schedule a reconsideration hearing three years after the date of the initial hearing. However, there is an exception in certain circumstances in which the offense resulted in the death of a victim, in which case the reconsideration hearing may be scheduled up to five years from the date of the initial hearing.
QUESTION: How long will the Parole Commission continue to exist? Is there a move to abolish the Parole Commission because of poor performance?
ANSWER: Congress has extended the life of the Commission until November 2005. Before that date, Congress will make the decision whether to make the Commission permanent, extend the Commission, or give the duties of the Commission to other agencies. Congress recommended that the Attorney General conduct a study to determine the feasibility of giving responsibility for supervised release for DC Code offenders to another, unspecified agency. The study is due November 2004. At least in the opinion of the Commission, this study was not driven by any perception that the Commission is performing poorly. For the past eighteen months, the Commission has successfully met the time requirements for revocation hearings as specified in the compliance plan developed in response to Long v Gaines. Once the backlog of cases that came to the Commission was resolved, the Commission has met its obligations in an exemplary fashion.
QUESTION: Does the Commission have a different policy for street time for federal and D.C. Code parole violators?
ANSWER: Giving street time is determined solely by the applicable statute. The Commission does not have discretion in this regard. The federal and D.C. codes are different. The D.C. Code does not allow the Commission to give street time, while the federal code requires the Commission to award street time unless the parole violator has incurred a new conviction or certain other conditions are present.
QUESTION: If someone believes that the Commission arrived at a decision based on inaccurate or incomplete information, can this be brought to the attention of the Commission?
ANSWER: If there is an error in the record, the Commission strongly encourages offenders, their family, or their representatives to write the Commission and point out the error. If the new information impacts the calculation of the guidelines, a corrected Notice of Action will be issued and, if appropriate, a new decision may be rendered. If necessary, a new hearing may be ordered.
QUESTION: If someone believes that a sentence is computed incorrectly, should they contact the Commission?
ANSWER: The Commission does not have the authority to compute sentences. The Commission recommends that concerns related to sentence computation be directed to the Bureau of Prisons.
QUESTION: What happens to letters of support that are sent to the Commission?
ANSWER: All letters of support are made part of the record and are considered by the Commission during the decision-making process. The Commission strongly encourages the submission of letters of support and welcomes all information that can guide the final parole decision. All letters should clearly identify the parole applicant being discussed in the letter and should include the register number or other official identifiers if at all possible. Identifying an inmate by name alone may not be sufficient, as many inmates have the same or similar names. It is also a good idea to send a copy of letters of support to the parole applicant to bring to the hearing in case a letter has been lost in the mail.
QUESTION: How does a parolee get placed on inactive supervision?
ANSWER: The Community Supervision Officer makes a yearly written report to the Parole Commission summarizing the parolee's compliance with the conditions of supervision. Normally, two years after release to supervision, and annually thereafter, the Commission reviews the case on the record to determine if the parolee should be placed on inactive supervision. The Commission considers the recommendation of the Supervision Officer, the record of the parolee's compliance with conditions of supervision, and makes the decision using guidelines published in the U.S. Parole Commission Rules and Procedures Manual, which can be found at the Commission's website.
QUESTION: Does the Commission have the authority to withdraw old warrants issued by the D.C. Board of Parole?
ANSWER: If circumstances warrant, the Commission has the authority to withdraw warrants issued by the D.C. Board of Parole. However, the general policy is to honor warrants issued by the previous Board.