Printer Friendly

U.S. District Court: PAROLE.

Closs v. Weber, 87 F.Supp.2d 921 (D.S.D. 1999). A prisoner challenged the revocation of his parole with a habeas corpus petition. The district court granted the petition, finding that the prisoner's due process rights were violated when his parole was revoked for exercising his right to refuse psychotropic medication that had been ordered administered by the parole agent. The court found the state's procedure for forced administration of psychotropic medication to parolees was constitutionally inadequate because of its heavy emphasis on the judgment of individual parole agents. The court noted that the state's procedure provided no safeguard against the imposition of a medication plan that was not justified medically and that the plan did not provide for an evaluation by a neutral decision maker. (South Dakota State Penitentiary)
COPYRIGHT 2000 CRS, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2000, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Publication:Corrections Caselaw Quarterly
Article Type:Brief Article
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:May 1, 2000
Words:132
Previous Article:U.S. Appeals Court: AEDPA- Antiterrorism & Effective Death Penaly Act ALIEN.
Next Article:U.S. District Court: PAROLE.
Topics:


Related Articles
U.S. Appeals Court: PAROLE SENTENCE.
U.S. Appeals Court: PAROLE REVOCATION EQUAL PROTECTION.
[0] U.S. District Court: PAROLE.
U.S. District Court: PAROLE.
U.S. District Court: PAROLE-POLICIES EX POST FACTO.
U.S. District Court: PAROLE GOOD TIME.
U.S. Appeals Court: PAROLE-REVOCATION GOOD TIME.
Habeas corpus.
Alexander v. Johnson.
Madley v. U.S. Parole Com'n.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2014 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters