LIFERs Administrative Review (AR) and Petition to Advance (PTA)

Since the In re Vicks (2013) case challenging Marsy's Law, BPH hase gone into a "spin" (see AR & PTA section below) to avoid a possible win (by the Lifers)  in the Federal case Gilman vs Brown (2/28/14) challenging Marsys' law - as applied.

Michael D. Vicks contended that application of the new parole procedures to prisoners who committed their crimes prior to the enactment of Marsy’s Law violates the ex post facto clauses of the federal and state Constitutions. (U.S. Const., art. I, § 10, cl. 1; Cal. Const., art. I, § 9.)  He challengeg the amendments both on their face and as applied to him.  Unfortunately the CA Supreme Court did not think there was anything wrong with applying this 2008 voted in Marsy's Law to Lifers that had already been sentenced BEFORE this law was enacted.Vicks was lost at the CA SUPREME court....

What does Unconstitutional  "AS APPLIED" mean for LIFERs......it means that if the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH) do not start using the available tools such as the Petition to Advance (PTA)  and the Administrative Power to recall inmate to a Parole Hearing earlier than their 3 to 15 year Denial,  then  Marsys's law may BE Unconstitutional "AS APPLIED" given a longer punishments (incarceration)  to the LIFERS.

......Stay tune for the continuing Marsy's law battle in the Federal Court. Gilman vs Brown (2/28/14)  CIV. S-05-830 LKK/CKD. In summary,  Plaintiffs assert that Propositions 9 (Marsy's Law) and 89  (Governor veto power) have retrospectively increased their punishments, in violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the U.S. Constitution.



PTA AND AR - GRANT RATES**:


**Thanks to all the Hard work of LIFE SUPPORT ALLIANCE (LSA, Vanessa and staff) we can provide the Grant rates of these tools. Since July 2012 the BOARDS's legal team now reviews most 3-year denials approximately 12 months after the hearing and may recommend advancing the Hearing earlier then the original denial years. This Administrative Review (ARs) will verify if significant progress is perceived, if yes the LIFER will be notified  (SUA SPONTE - no action on the LIFER's part) that his hearing will be advanced.

BELOW are the GRANT RATES for both ARs and PTAs. Originally (2009) the PTA grant rates were around 2% when Marsys' law was voted in 2008. BPH officials are reporting that 58% of PTAs submitted by Inmates are approved. In turn, of those advanced BPH hearings via the PTA (BPH 1045 form) are granted at the rate of 24% AND via the AR system they are granted at the rate of 29.5%.

58% Grant on the PTA -- A much improved rate from the 2% PTA grant of 2009-2011 or so. The MESSAGE HERE...and rule of thumb - if the inmate is denied at their hearing make sure the inmate (or the Attorney filing the PTA) reviews the reason why the BOARD denied the inmate in the first place and correct all those flaws then apply for the PTA - there will be a 58% s/he will get a new hearing.

DSL or ISL (aka LIFERs) - Elderly Parole Program to Start October 1, 2014

On February 10, 2014, the Three Judge Panel in the Plata/Coleman class action

lawsuit ordered CDCR to finalize and implement a new parole process whereby elderly inmates will be referred to the Board of Parole Hearings (board) to determine suitability for parole.The procedures for the new Elderly Parole Program will affect parole suitability hearings scheduled on or after October 1, 2014

Below is an Excerpt of the BHP Memo that came out earlier in June 2014 on the

ELDERLY PAROLE PROGRAM. The full (BPH memo) can be read at Attorney Diane Letarte's Website. Make sure to hire an Experienced Attorney that understand the Hallmarks of our Elderly population, who can properly present the special consideration along with any Medical issues that are relevant to the Commissioners during deliberation at the Parole Hearing.

Eligibility:
 Inmates who are 60 years or older and who have  been incarcerated for  25 years or  more are  eligible for  the  Elderly Parole Program.  Eligible inmates may be serving an   indeterminate (ISL aka Lifers) or a determinate sentence (DSL).

CRITERIA to be considered at Parole Hearing:

During the administrative review and the petition to advance (PTA) processes, the board will give special consideration  to eligible  inmates advanced age, long-term confinement, and diminished physical condition, if any exist.

 
Marsy's Law (Prop 9) Still applies:
If an eligible inmate is denied parole, the denial length will be set pursuant to Penal Code section 3041.5(b)(4) (“Marsy’s Law”) for 3, 5, 7, 10, or 15 years.

 

Psychological Risk Assessments:

Inmates who are scheduled for a Elderly hearing on or after October 1, 2014,  will receive a new  or revised Psychological risk  assessment , which will  specifically address how the inmate’s  advanced  age,  long-term  confinement, and diminished physical condition, if any,  may  impact the inmate’s  potential  risk  for future violence.

.

 

 

 

Federal judge declared California's death penalty unconstitutional - 748 CA inmates on Death Row

This is a partial REPRINT of the SF Gate.  See SF Article

See also the LA times article.

A federal judge declared California's death penalty unconstitutional Wednesday, saying delays of 25 years or more in deciding appeals and carrying out occasional executions have created an arbitrary and irrational system that serves no legitimate purpose.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney of Santa Ana was limited to a single case and had no immediate impact on executions statewide, which have been halted by federal courts since 2006 because of multiple problems in lethal injection procedures.

But if upheld on appeal, the decision would end a California capital punishment system that has been approved by the voters three times - in 1972, 1978 and 2012, when an initiative to abolish the death penalty lost by four percentage points. Despite voter sentiment, the death penalty in California has rarely been implemented in recent decades.

The state has the nation's largest Death Row, with 748 inmates, and its lowest execution rate, with 13 inmates put to death since 1992.

=================================================================
STAY TUNE: This case has the potential to be a very important one for CA Death Row inmate.

 

          (San Quentin being the major housing for the Death row inmate in CA)