| House Bill 2823, sponsored by
Del. Thomas David Rust, requires that the Parole Board rules and guidelines
for parole and eligibility be published and posted for public review and
that the monthly statement regarding action taken by the Board on the parole
of prisoners shall include the basis for denial of parole for the first
time. This action passed the House on a vote of 98-0. The Senate vote was
39-0. The bill makes minor but significant changes to to the parole statute
§ 53.1-136. This bill, which takes effect July 1, 2005 will now require
that the criteria for parole eligibility be written and posted for public
review as well as itemizing all parole denials as to the reasons stated.
The purpose behind this bill was an attempt by the General Assembly to
address the numerous complaints they had received concerning the abuse
of "serious nature of the offense" excuse for parole denial that
so many inmates receive. There is also debate among legal observers as
if this change in fact now creates a "liberty interest" in parole
in Virginia. The biggest issue that has yet to be addresses is the parole
eligibility rules themselves which the parole board is required to devise.
Since this change does not take effect until July 1st and the fact that
this is an election year, which could ultimately lead to the naming of
a new parole board, some think that the Parole Board may drag it's feet
until the end of the year to publish any rules. Regardless, this action
on the part of the General Assembly is a positive step in finally addressing
the issue of parole consideration for those "old-law" individuals
still within the system who had been systematically denied parole to date.
Source: VA General Assembly Clerk's Office |
General Tidbits
Code Rewrite
Senate Joint Resolution 388 which was passed in this past General
Assembly advises the citizens of Virginia of the intention on the Va..
Code Commission to publish a 2007 Code of Va. to replace the Code of 1950.
Parole Board Suit
Members of the Va. Board of Parole were entitled to absolute immunity
with regards to decisions they made in determining whether inmate would
be granted parole. Va. inmate did not have a liberty interest in parole
protected by due process and was at most entitled to receive a statement
of the reason for the denial of parole. Robinson v. Fahey, 366 F.Supp.
368 (4/14/05)
Inmate Fee
A charge of one dollar per day imposed upon a pretrial detainee was
not "punishment" and therefore, did not violate due process. The
Virginia statute authorizing the charge expressed no intent to punish on
its face, was an effort to offset the cost of housing, had a rational relationship
to a legitimate government interest and was not excessive in relation to
that purposes. This was a case of first impression. Slade v. Hampton
Roads Regional Jail, 407 F.3d 243 (5/9/05) |
| Inmates who were sentenced before parole was abolished in 1994,
remain eligible for early release but the percentage being granted parole
has plummeted. The current 8% parole rate is one of the lowest in the nation. |
A
| Year |
Parole Rate |
Governor
|
|
1981
|
30%
|
Dalton
|
|
1982
|
35%
|
Robb
|
|
1983
|
43%
|
"
|
|
1984
|
35%
|
"
|
|
1985
|
29%
|
"
|
|
1986
|
33%
|
Bailes
|
|
1987
|
36%
|
"
|
|
1989
|
37%
|
"
|
|
1990
|
47%
|
Wilder
|
|
1991
|
45%
|
"
|
|
1992
|
42%
|
"
|
|
1993
|
40%
|
"
|
|
1994
|
25%
|
Allen
|
|
1995
|
14%
|
"
|
|
1996
|
18%
|
"
|
|
1997
|
20%
|
"
|
|
1998
|
16%
|
Gilmore
|
|
1999
|
7%
|
"
|
|
2000
|
8%
|
"
|
|
2001
|
8%
|
"
|
|
2002
|
8%
|
Warner
|
A
|
INCARCERATION STATISTICS
1,470.045 inmates nationwide
38,000 state inmates
47 prisons house 30,500 inmates
balance in local & regional jails
VA DOC projection 2006 - 42,575 inmates
Source: July 15, 2004 VA Pilot Article |
|
