Jones v. Ray.U.S. Appeals Court PAROLE -- DUE PROCESS EQUAL PROTECTION Jones v. Ray, 279 F.3d 944 (11th Cir. 2001). An inmate who had been denied parole brought a [section] 1983 action against a state parole board pa`role´ board` n. 1. A group of individuals with authority to determine whether a prisoner will be granted parole from a particular prison. . The district court dismissed the case and the inmate appealed. The appeals court affirmed, finding that the inmate's conclusory con·clu·so·ry adj. 1. Conclusive. 2. Law Convincing, but not so much so that contradiction is impossible; not justified or supported by all the facts: allegation that the parole board relied on false information contained in his parole file was insufficient to state a claim for a due process violation. The appeals court also found that application of an amended parole rule, that required reconsideration of parole only once every eight years, did not violate the ex post facto ex post facto adj. Latin for "after the fact," which refers to laws adopted after an act is committed making it illegal although it was legal when done, or increases the penalty for a crime after it is committed. Such laws are specifically prohibited by the U. S. clause when applied to an inmate who was already confined at the time the amendment was adopted. (Georgia Board of Pardons Part of the executive branch of state government authorized to grant pardons, and restore civil and political rights, to individuals convicted of crimes. A pardon, in the legal sense, releases an individual from punishment or penalty, but does not necessarily exonerate them of guilt. and Paroles) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion