Texas Parole James Randall Smith – Attorney at Law HOME WELCOME ABOUT US NEWS PAROLES PAROLE LETTERS PAROLE WINS OUR BOOK CONTACT News Posted on October 23, 2021 by admin March 18, 2020 RUMORS: The Release Fairy Revisited: There is a certain segment of the inmate population that still believes in the Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the Texas Legislature. I have consistently explained there has not been a change in the law regarding 3g offenses or those other offenses that are not listed under 3g but require one-half of the sentence to be served day-for-day. If you are charged with one of these offenses, you must serve one-half of your sentence day-for-day before you are eligible for parole. There has not been a change in this law by the Texas Legislature either in the last Legislature Session in 2017 or in the recent 2019 Legislature. In an attempt to stop the rumors before they begin, the Texas Legislature meets every 2-years and the next time it will be in session will be 2021. Any rumors you hear about the Texas Legislature changing some law between now and 2021 will be false. The Parole Time Calculations Chart our office created in 2015 is still the law. If you want a copy of this chart, please write to my office. NEW LAWS FROM THE 2019 TEXAS LEGISLATURE: We have reviewed the proposed bills dealing with Inmates and the Criminal Justice System that were submitted in the 2019 Texas Legislature. Over 90% of the Bills submitted were never passed out of the committee and sent to the floor of the House and Senate and voted on. If we have not listed this bill in this newsletter, it was not voted on and signed by the governor so therefore it is NOT a law. HB 650 – This Bill Passed and will be a law effective September 2019. The law sets up a program to train staff to assist pregnant inmates and to provide education and parenting skills to the inmate. HB 812 -This Bill Passed and will be a law effective September 2019. An inmate confined in a facility operated by or under contract with the department, other than a halfway house, who initiates a visit to a health care provider shall pay a health care services fee to the department in the amount of $3.00 per visit. HB 918 – This Bill Passed and will be a law effective September 2019. TDCJ shall supply to a released inmate documentation to assist in the inmate obtaining employment by supplying him/her a copy of the inmate’s job training record, copy of the inmate’s work record and any trade learned by the inmate. HB 1342 – House Bill 1342 amends the Occupations Code to set out and revise provisions regarding the eligibility for certain occupational licenses for a person who has been convicted of an offense. The bill removes as grounds for disqualification for an occupational license a conviction for an offense that does not directly relate to the duties and responsibilities of the licensed occupation and that was committed less than five years before the date the person applies for the applicable license. Among other provisions, the bill requires a licensing authority to provide written notice and allow a person to submit relevant information to the authority before the authority may deny the person a license or the opportunity to be examined for a license based on the person’s prior conviction of an offense. The bill requires the state auditor, in collaboration with licensing authorities, to develop a best practice guide for an applicant with a prior conviction to use when applying for a license and to publish the guide on the state auditor’s website. The bill also provides for the issuance of restricted licenses for air conditioning and refrigeration contractors and electricians as an alternative to denying, revoking, suspending, or refusing to issue or renew a license under certain circumstances. HB 1343 – This Bill Passed and will be a law effective September 2019. The law states that a person commits an offense if while confined in a correctional facility contacts by letter, telephone, or any other means, either directly or through a third party, a victim of the offense or member of the victims family if the director of the correctional facility has not, before the person makes contact with the victim: received a written and dated consent to communicate with the victim, victims family, or member of the victims family liable for a criminal offense. HB 3227 – This Bill Passed and will be law effective September 2019. This Law makes available certain programs for female inmates which are presently available to male inmates. SB 719 – This Bill Passed and will be a Law effective September 2019. SB 719 will be known as Lauren’s Law. This Law amends current law relating to increasing the punishment for certain conduct constituting the offense of murder and providing for the prosecution of that conduct as capital murder. Example: If an inmate murders another offender, the charge will, in all likelihood, be enhanced to capital murder. SB 719 would increase the age of a victim for which a defendant can be prosecuted for a capital felony from under the age of 10 to under the age of 15. The House committee substitute added a provision stating that a defendant who is found guilty of this offense may not be sentenced to death, and the state may not seek the death penalty, in any case based solely on an offense under this subdivision. NOT PASSED: Due to interest by inmates, I have included the following bills that were NOT passed: HB 936 – Temperature Requirements: Relating to a study on reducing the level at which the air temperature in facilities operated by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice is regulated. TDCJ is not required to comply. HB 1271 – Relating to the award of good conduct time to certain inmates; changing parole eligibility. Good conduct time applies only to eligibility for parole or mandatory supervision and does not otherwise affect an inmate’s term. Good conduct time is a privilege and not a right. HB 3078 – This Bill was Vetoed by Governor Abbott. HB 3078 would require the Board of Pardons and Paroles to appoint a panel of experts to review an application for clemency for a person who was convicted of an offense under duress or coercion as a result of being the victim of human trafficking, or an assault committed by an actor who is or has been in a dating relationship with (or is in the family or household of) the assaulted. The board would be required to publish the application process for clemency on their website. The board would also be required to immediately submit any applications to the panel for review. The panel would review the application and submit their recommendation to the board within 6 months of receiving the application. HB 3296 – Relating to the award of diligent participation credit to defendants serving a sentence for a state jail felony offense.Did NOT pass. HB 4163 – Relating to the authority of a court to grant a commutation of punishment for certain persons released on parole. Did NOT pass. CHANGES TO THE PAROLE BOARDS: There are two new Parole Board Commissioners at the Amarillo Parole Board. Elodia Brito who has over 21-years of courtroom experience as a courtroom deputy for the Magistrate Courts of the Amarillo Division of the State of Texas. Mary J. Farley has over 28-years in the Corrections profession and has 26-years as Jail Administrator. She is past president of the Texas Jail Association. The Angleton Parole Board has a new member: Raymond Gonzalez who has over 38- years’ experience in Criminal Justice which includes 20-years with the Texas Department of Criminal Justice in positions from a Parole Officer, Assistant Regional Supervisor and Assistant Warden. WARNING ABOUT WAITING TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY: We continue to receive numerous telephone calls requesting assistance from loved ones of inmates in Texas prisons. Too often, we must refuse representation of the inmate because of the misunderstanding of the term parole eligibility date. Loved ones read the term Parole Eligibility Date on the web and don=t realize it means exactly what it says which is: an inmate can be released to parole any time after that parole eligibility date. It is NOT a parole hearing date. All too often I am contacted too late to be able to assist the inmate. During the representation of an inmate we investigate, gather evidence, review the evidence and prepare a parole package that might be as large as 30-40 pages which has to be filed in a timely manner as required by the Board. We must also prepare a compelling argument to present to the Board. This type of legal work takes time! Under Texas Parole Board rules and policy, the Parole Board may vote on an inmate=s release to parole as early as 60-days before the parole eligibility date. Upon receiving the file, the Board will review any evidence contained in the file and then determine if the inmate should remain incarcerated or be released. Board rules allow all inmates being considered for parole to be interviewed by parole officials approximately six (6) months before the parole eligibility date for a first review and four (4) months before additional next review dates. The Board rules require that the parole package MUST be filed on or before the 60-day voting window. We must be hired several months prior to the parole eligibility date to allow us time to find the evidence and place it in the Parole Package and present it to the Parole Board. It is my advice not to retain any attorney who will accept representing an inmate before the Parole Board who does not have enough time to investigate, evaluate, prepare a substantial parole package and prepare a compelling argument for the Parole Board. There are attorneys who have a form and they remove the name of their previous client from the form and insert their new client=s name into the form. It has been my experience that this type of representation does not change a Parole Board Member’s mind regarding releasing an inmate. If the inmate is released after such a form is submitted, the inmate would have probably been released anyway. Under Texas law, the burden is upon the inmate to find the evidence, produce the evidence, and convince the Parole Board to grant an inmate parole from prison. If there is no evidence in the file showing the inmate has changed, has confronted whatever has caused him/her to commit crimes, and convince the Parole Board the inmate is no longer a threat to society (a threat to society can be any future criminal act, it does not necessarily have to be any type of violent crime) then the Parole Board must deny the inmate release from prison. Should the Parole Board decide not to release an inmate to parole, they then determine when they would be willing to review the inmate again. While most cases have a one-year set-off before they are reviewed again by the Parole Board, there are other cases that can receive a 5 or 10-year set-off, depending on the type of crime. It is my advice to contact a parole attorney at least a minimum of 8-9 months prior to the parole eligibility date. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you desire my legal assistance with release to parole. August 16, 2019 RUMORS: The Release Fairy Revisited: There is a certain segment of the inmate population that still believes in the Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the Texas Legislature. I have consistently explained there has not been a change in the law regarding 3g offenses or those other offenses that are not listed under 3g but require one-half of the sentence to be served day-for-day. If you are charged with one of these offenses, you must serve one-half of your sentence day-for-day before you are eligible for parole. There has not been a change in this law by the Texas Legislature either in the last Legislature Session in 2017 or in the recent 2019 Legislature. In an attempt to stop the rumors before they begin, the Texas Legislature meets every 2-years and the next time it will be in session will be 2021. Any rumors you hear about the Texas Legislature changing some law between now and 2021 will be false. The Parole Time Calculations Chart our office created in 2015 is still the law. If you want a copy of this chart, please write to my office. NEW LAWS FROM THE 2019 TEXAS LEGISLATURE: We have reviewed the proposed bills dealing with Inmates and the Criminal Justice System that were submitted in the 2019 Texas Legislature. Over 90% of the Bills submitted were never passed out of the committee and sent to the floor of the House and Senate and voted on.If we have not listed this bill in this newsletter, it was not voted on and signed by the governor so therefore it is NOT a law. HB 650 – This Bill Passed and will be a law effective September 2019. The law sets up a program to train staff to assist pregnant inmates and to provide education and parenting skills to the inmate. HB 812-This Bill Passed and will be a law effective September 2019. An inmate confined in a facility operated by or under contract with the department, other than a halfway house, who initiates a visit to a health care provider shall pay a health care services fee to the department in the amount of $3.00 per visit. HB 918 – This Bill Passed and will be a law effective September 2019. TDCJ shall supply to a released inmate documentation to assist in the inmate obtaining employment by supplying him/her a copy of the inmate’s job training record, copy of the inmate’s work record and any trade learned by the inmate. HB 1342 – House Bill 1342 amends the Occupations Code to set out and revise provisions regarding the eligibility for certain occupational licenses for a person who has been convicted of an offense. The bill removes as grounds for disqualification for an occupational license a conviction for an offense that does not directly relate to the duties and responsibilities of the licensed occupation and that was committed less than five years before the date the person applies for the applicable license. Among other provisions, the bill requires a licensing authority to provide written notice and allow a person to submit relevant information to the authority before the authority may deny the person a license or the opportunity to be examined for a license based on the person’s prior conviction of an offense. The bill requires the state auditor, in collaboration with licensing authorities, to develop a best practice guide for an applicant with a prior conviction to use when applying for a license and to publish the guide on the state auditor’s website. The bill also provides for the issuance of restricted licenses for air conditioning and refrigeration contractors and electricians as an alternative to denying, revoking, suspending, or refusing to issue or renew a license under certain circumstances. HB 1343 – This Bill Passed and will be a law effective September 2019. The law states that a person commits an offense if while confined in a correctional facility contacts by letter, telephone, or any other means, either directly or through a third party, a victim of the offense or member of the victims family if the director of the correctional facility has not, before the person makes contact with the victim: received a written and dated consent to communicate with the victim, victims family, or member of the victims family liable for a criminal offense. HB 3227 – This Bill Passed and will be law effective September 2019. This Law makes available certain programs for female inmates which are presently available to male inmates. SB 719 – This Bill Passed and will be a Law effective September 2019. SB 719 will be known asLauren’s Law. This Law amends current law relating to increasing the punishment for certain conduct constituting the offense of murder and providing for the prosecution of that conduct as capital murder. Example: If an inmate murders another offender, the charge will, in all likelihood, be enhanced to capital murder. SB 719 would increase the age of a victim for which a defendant can be prosecuted for a capital felony from under the age of 10 to under the age of 15. The House committee substitute added a provision stating that a defendant who is found guilty of this offense may not be sentenced to death, and the state may not seek the death penalty, in any case based solely on an offense under this subdivision. NOT PASSED: Due to interest by inmates, I have included the following bills that were NOTpassed: HB 936 – Temperature Requirements: Relating to a study on reducing the level at which the air temperature in facilities operated by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice is regulated. TDCJ is not required to comply. HB 1271 –Relating to the award of good conduct time to certain inmates; changing parole eligibility. Good conduct time applies only to eligibility for parole or mandatory supervision and does not otherwise affect an inmate’s term. Good conduct time is a privilege and not a right. HB 3078 – This Bill was Vetoedby Governor Abbott. HB 3078 would require the Board of Pardons and Paroles to appoint a panel of experts to review an application for clemency for a person who was convicted of an offense under duress or coercion as a result of being the victim of human trafficking, or an assault committed by an actor who is or has been in a dating relationship with (or is in the family or household of) the assaulted. The board would be required to publish the application process for clemency on their website. The board would also be required to immediately submit any applications to the panel for review. The panel would review the application and submit their recommendation to the board within 6 months of receiving the application. HB 3296 – Relating to the award of diligent participation credit to defendants serving a sentence for a state jail felony offense.Did NOT pass. HB 4163 – Relating to the authority of a court to grant a commutation of punishment for certain persons released on parole. Did NOT pass. CHANGES TO THE PAROLE BOARDS: There are two new Parole Board Commissioners at the Amarillo Parole Board. Elodia Brito who has over 21-years of courtroom experience as a courtroom deputy for the Magistrate Courts of the Amarillo Division of the State of Texas. Mary J. Farley has over 28-years in the Corrections profession and has 26-years as Jail Administrator. She is past president of the Texas Jail Association. The Angleton Parole Board has a new member: Raymond Gonzalez who has over 38- years’ experience in Criminal Justice which includes 20-years with the Texas Department of Criminal Justice in positions from a Parole Officer, Assistant Regional Supervisor and Assistant Warden. WARNING ABOUT WAITING TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY: We continue to receive numerous telephone calls requesting assistance from loved ones of inmates in Texas prisons. Too often, we must refuse representation of the inmate because of the misunderstanding of the term parole eligibility date. Loved ones read the term Parole Eligibility Dateon the web and don=t realize it means exactly what it says which is: an inmate can be released to parole any time after that parole eligibility date. It is NOT a parole hearing date. All too often I am contacted too late to be able to assist the inmate. During the representation of an inmate we investigate, gather evidence, review the evidence and prepare a parole package that might be as large as 30-40 pages which has to be filed in a timely manner as required by the Board. We must also prepare a compelling argument to present to the Board. This type of legal work takes time! Under Texas Parole Board rules and policy, the Parole Board may vote on an inmate=s release to parole as early as 60-days before the parole eligibilitydate. Upon receiving the file, the Board will review any evidence contained in the file and then determine if the inmate should remain incarcerated or be released. Board rules allow all inmates being considered for parole to be interviewed by parole officials approximately six (6) months before the parole eligibility date for a first review and four (4) months before additional next review dates. The Board rules require that the parole package MUST be filed on or before the 60-day voting window. We must be hired several months prior to the parole eligibility dateto allow us time to find the evidence and place it in the Parole Package and present it to the Parole Board. It is my advice not to retain any attorney who will accept representing an inmate before the Parole Board who does not have enough time to investigate, evaluate, prepare a substantial parole package and prepare a compelling argument for the Parole Board. There are attorneys who have a form and they remove the name of their previous client from the form and insert their new client=s name into the form. It has been my experience that this type of representation does not change a Parole Board Member=s mind regarding releasing an inmate. If the inmate is released after such a form is submitted, the inmate would have probably been released anyway. Under Texas law, the burden is upon the inmate to find the evidence, produce the evidence, and convince the Parole Board to grant an inmate parole from prison. If there is no evidence in the file showing the inmate has changed, has confronted whatever has caused him/her to commit crimes, and convince the Parole Board the inmate is no longer a threat to society (a threat to society can be any future criminal act, it does not necessarily have to be any type of violent crime) then the Parole Board must deny the inmate release from prison. Should the Parole Board decide not to release an inmate to parole, they then determine when they would be willing to review the inmate again. While most cases have a one-year set-off before they are reviewed again by the Parole Board, there are other cases that can receive a 5 or 10-year set-off, depending on the type of crime. It is my advice to contact a parole attorney at least a minimum of 8-9 months prior to the parole eligibility date. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you desire my legal assistance with release to parole. February 14, 2019 Versión en Español RUMORS: 1. The Release Fairy Revisited: There is a certain segment of the inmate population that still believes in the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus. I have consistently explained there has not been a change in the law regarding 3g offenses or those other offenses that are not listed under 3g but require one-half of the sentence to be served day for day. If you are charged with one of these offenses you must serve one-half of your sentence day for day before you are eligible for parole. There has not been a change in this law by the Texas Legislature either in the last Legislature Session in 2017 or the 2019 Legislature as of the date of this newsletter. The Parole Time Calculations Chart our office created in 2015 is still the law. The fact the Texas Legislature continues to add new crimes requiring an inmate to serve at least one-half of the sentence before becoming eligible for parole indicates they are not interested in reducing parole eligibility requirements for inmates. If you look at the Texas Legislature you can understand why there is very little possibility of any reduction in parole eligibility. The Governor of the state of Texas is a Republican, the Lieutenant Governor is a Republican, the majority of both the House and Senate are Republicans. Republicans do not have a reputation of being interested in helping people who have been convicted of a crime. So, when you hear one of these inmates tell you the Release Fairy has informed them of some change in the Legislature that benefits the inmate, you should be extremely skeptical. While the Legislature went into session in January 2019 there have been no new laws passed and there will not be any until the Governor signs any proposed laws passed by both Houses of the Texas Legislature sometime in the summer of 2019. This office will be sending out a newsletter once we know what the law is affecting the inmates of Texas. 2. Federal Laws Effect Texas Inmates: FALSE. There is a persistent rumor that is going around. Again the Release Fairy has told someone the Texas prisons must release inmates because of the changes in the law passed by the United State Congress and signed by the President of the United States. Federal laws only affect federal inmates, not state inmates. EXAMPLE: If Federal laws affected Texas inmates then Texas inmates would have to serve their entire sentence day for day as do federal inmates. Texas inmates have parole and Federal inmates do not have parole, therefore Federal laws do not affect Texas inmates. 3. If You Are Granted Parole on A 3G Offense and You Are Revoked You Do Not Lose Your Street Time. FALSE. If you are revoked by the Parole Board, returned to prison and you have a 3g charge, you lose all street time even if you have served all or most of your parole. The Parole Revocation warrant has to be filed any time prior to the expiration of the inmate’s parole to jeopardize the inmate losing all of his street time. The inmate/parolee will only receive credited time for the time served in custody either in prison or awaiting revocation in county custody. 4. You Can Appeal a Parole Revocation: TRUE. When a parolee receives a notice the Parole Board has voted to revoke the parolee’s parole, he/she has 60-days from the date of the decision to request the hearing be reopened. The grounds for the reopening of the hearing are (1) For a substantial error in the revocation process; or (2) Newly discovered information. We have been representing inmates in revocation hearings for over 30-years and the first grounds is almost impossible to prove and the second is hard, but can be done. We have been lucky and haven’t had to appeal a case in some 13-years. Not one of our clients has been returned to prison. We treat each revocation hearing as if it was a criminal case and we gather evidence to show the Board our clients should not be revoked and returned to prison. It is hard work in finding the evidence that allows us to be so successful in Parole Revocation hearings. NEWS: Changes to the Parole Boards: Parole Commissioner Marsha Moberly has relocated from the Amarillo Parole Board to the Austin Parole Board. Her position was taken by Elodia Brito who worked for 21-years with the Federal Courts of the Northern District of Texas. The Angleton Parole Board has two new members. Governor Abbot appointed Carmella Jones as the Board Member. She has 25-years of law enforcement and corrections experience. She was elected as the Armstrong County Sheriff and served in that capacity for 6-years. Gerald Garrett was appointed as Parole Commissioner to the Angleton Board. He previously served as a Parole Board Member and has over 30-years of experience in criminal justice. Governor Abbott appointed D’Wayne Jernigan as the Board Member to the Huntsville Board. Board Member Jernigan is a Licensed Private Investigator and was Senior Advisor to the Victoria County Sheriff’s Office. Release Rates by Board and Members: Amarillo Board Angleton Board Austin Board James LaFavers38.9%Carmella Jones50.2%Ed Robertson42.7% Raymond Gonzalez 34.6% Gerald Garrett 30.9% Troy Fox 38.1% Elodia Brito 29.0% Ira Evans 29.8% Marsha Moberly 36.9% Board Release Rate 34.1% 36.9% 39.2% Gatesville Board Huntsville Board Palestine Board David Gutierrez 89.4% D’Waynne Jernigan 37.4% Brian Long 36.8% Lee Ann Massingill 38.3% Roy Garcia 27.4% James Hensarling 40.9% Roel Tejeda 37.2% Wanda Saliagas 24.2% James Kiel 35.0% Board Release Rate 54.9% 29.6% 37.5% San Antonio Board Fred Solis 35.2% Charles Speier 37.8% Anthony Ramirez 31.6% Board Release Rate 34.8% These are the parole release rates up until January 2019. The Board’s average release rate may not accurately reflect what the release rate may be over time as new Parole Board Members may grow less conservative or more conservative after months of working on Parole Applications. We will be revisiting this information and will then place the information in one of the future newsletters for the inmates consideration. The Gatesville Parole Board release rate is skewed because Mr. Gutierrez is also the Presiding Board Member for the Parole Board and he votes very few cases because of his job description. A more accurate Board Release Rate for the Gatesville Board would be the average of the two Parole Board Commissioners which would be 37.7%. WARNING ABOUT WAITING TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY: We continue to receive numerous telephone calls requesting assistance from loved ones of inmates in Texas prisons. Too often, we must refuse representation of the inmate because of the misunderstanding of the term parole eligibility date. Loved ones read the term Parole Eligibility Date on the web and don’t realize it means exactly what it says which is: an inmate can be released to parole any time after that parole eligibility date. It is NOT a parole hearing date. All too often I am contacted too late to be able to assist the inmate. During the representation of an inmate we investigate, gather evidence, review the evidence and prepare a parole package that might be as large as 30-40 pages which has to be filed in a timely manner as required by the Board. We must also prepare a compelling argument to present to the Board. This type of legal work takes time! Under Texas Parole Board rules and policy, the Parole Board may vote on an inmate’s release to parole as early as 60-days before the parole eligibility date. Upon receiving the file, the Board will review any evidence contained in the file and then determine if the inmate should remain incarcerated or be released. Board rules allow all inmates being considered for parole to be interviewed by parole officials approximately six (6) months before the parole eligibility date for a first review and four (4) months before additional next review dates. The Board rules require that the parole package MUST be filed on or before the 60-day voting window. We must be hired several months prior to the parole eligibility date to allow us time to find the evidence and place it in the Parole Package and present it to the Parole Board. It is my advice not to retain any attorney who will accept representing an inmate before the Parole Board who does not have enough time to investigate, evaluate, prepare a substantial parole package and prepare a compelling argument for the Parole Board. There are attorneys who have a form and they remove the name of their previous client from the form and insert their new client’s name into the form. It has been my experience that this type of representation does not change a Parole Board Member’s mind regarding releasing an inmate. If the inmate is released after such a form is submitted, the inmate would have probably been released anyway. Under Texas law, the burden is upon the inmate to find the evidence, produce the evidence, and convince the Parole Board to grant an inmate parole from prison. If there is no evidence in the file showing the inmate has changed, has confronted whatever has caused him/her to commit crimes, and convince the Parole Board the inmate is no longer a threat to society (a threat to society can be any future criminal act, it does not necessarily have to be any type of violent crime) then the Parole Board must deny the inmate release from prison. Should the Parole Board decide not to release an inmate to parole, they then determine when they would be willing to review the inmate again. While most cases have a one-year set-off before they are reviewed again by the Parole Board, there are other cases that can receive a 5 or 10-year set-off, depending on the type of crime. It is my advice to contact a parole attorney at least a minimum of 8-9 months prior to the parole eligibility date. For those inmates/clients who only speak and read Spanish, an attorney at my office, Johnny P. Papantonakis is available to assist you. He is fluent in both spoken and written Spanish and can assist individuals who need to discuss their case in Spanish. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you desire my legal assistance with release to parole. July, 2018 PAROLE ELIGIBILITY IN TEXAS: Most people who go to the TDCJ-ID Website and look up an inmate see a date indicating parole eligibilityand believe it is a hearing date. This is wrong! Parole eligibility means any time after this date the inmate can be released from prison if the Parole Board receives sufficient evidence to be convinced the inmate deserves to be released to parole and is no longer a threat to society. The parole eligibility date is quite often misunderstood. Under Texas Parole Board rules and policy, the Parole Board may receive an inmate’s file as early as 60-days before the parole eligibilitydate, review any evidence contained in the file and then determine if the inmate should remain incarcerated or be released. Board rules allow all inmates being considered for parole to be interviewed by parole officials approximately six (6) months before the parole eligibility date for a first review and four (4) months before additional next review dates. The Board rules require that the parole package MUST be filed on or before the 60-day voting window or else they do not even have to look at the package. Because individuals do not understand these things, I repeatedly have to turn down clients because they wait too late to contact me for parole assistance. In order to be able to assist an inmate for parole, I must be contacted a minimum of 6-months prior to the eligibility date. It is a lengthy and time consuming job and I must have time to perform all the needed procedures to prepare an effective, viable and substantial package. Do not wait. RUMORS: If you abscond past your discharge date, you will no longer have to serve time. FALSE. Once you abscond and a blue warrant is issued, you are no longer being credited time. After you are caught, you can be revoked even if it’s past your discharge date. Most likely all street time will be lost and the maximum will be served. Once you reach 1/4 of your sentence, you will automatically be released on parole. A non-aggravated sentence is calculated by adding good time, work time and actual time served and once this is equivalent to 1/4 the sentence, then an inmate is eligible for parole consideration by the Board. TIME CUT. In the 30 + years that I have been representing inmates, I have never seen a Time Cut granted. Although there is such a thing as a Time Cut, PLEASE you need to understand the requirements. To receive a Time Cut two of the following three things must occur: (1) The Sheriff of the County where the crime occurred, the District Attorney who prosecuted the inmate and the Judge who sentenced the inmate, must agree to reduce the sentence. (2) Then, if two of the three officials agree to reduce the sentence, the request is sent to the Parole Board where three-fourths of the Members must agree to reduce the sentence. (3) IF that should happen, then it is sent to the Governor who at his discretion can agree or disagree to reduce the sentence. A Time Cut is like a unicorn, everyone wants it to exist, but no one has ever really seen one. NEWS: The rising inmate health costs have lawmakers contemplating increasing the health care co-payments by inmates in 2019.Presently the inmate co-payment is $100 per year and the legislature is contemplating increasing it to $200 per year. The budget is presently 6.7 billion dollars for TDCJ per two-year budget cycle.The Governor is proposing a 3% decrease across the board which will mean food costs, health care, and rehabilitative programs will be reviewed by the legislature and some will probably be cut. Example: Inmate health care for the preceding two-years was 247 million dollars. The legislature will be looking for a means to reduce that cost. Testimony by the head of criminal justice board indicates they will have to cut 421 million dollars from the budget to meet the Governor’s initiative. A Federal Judge has APPROVED the settlement mandating air conditioning in hot Texas prisons. TDCJ reflects that more women are being incarcerated in Texas prisons and jails than ever before. Between 2009 – 2016, the men’s prison population decreased by 8,500, while women’s population increased by 500. Board Voting Percentages: Approval Rating Amarillo Board Angleton Board Austin Board Gatesville Board Huntsville Board Palestine Board San Antonio Board Board Members: James LaFavers Vacancy Ed Robertson David Gutierrez Fred Rangel Bryan Long Fred Solis Agg (No Sex) 38.0% 36.1% 40.0% 35.0% 28.7% 36.8% Agg (Sex) 67.0% 66.7% 88.9% 53.2% 57.9% 57.9% Violent Not Agg (No Sex) 31.2% 27.9% 46.7% 29.1% 19.2% 26.5% Not Agg (Sex) 45.5% 37.7% 86.4% 30.9% 20.7% 34.2% Nonviolent (No Sex) 28.4% 43.6% 71.4% 39.1% 31.9% 28.4% TOTAL 40.4% 46.5% 84.1% 39.8% 34.7% 35.1% Commissioners: Marsha Moberley Lynn S. Ruzicka Troy Fox Lee Ann Massingill Wanda Saliagas James P. Kiel, Jr. Charles Speier Agg (No Sex) 31.0% 37.6% 39.9% 42.6% 28.5% 30.7% 34.0% Agg (Sex) 42.6% 38.3% 36.1% 57.9% 31.8% 34.2% 54.3% Violent Not Agg (No Sex) 31.6% 25.2% 29.1% 31.3% 19.5% 17.8% 27.2% Not Agg (Sex) 40.2% 19.3% 30.2% 25.6% 16.8% 20.3% 36.4% Nonviolent (No Sex) 37.2% 30.6% 39.9% 37.0% 26.2% 37.8% 34.4% TOTAL 35.1% 30.4% 37.6% 36.5% 25.2% 32.8% 33.1% Commissioners: Raymond Gonzalez Ira Evans Elvis Hightower Roel Tejada Roy (Tony) Garcia James Hensarling Anthony Ramirez Agg (No Sex) 37.2% 31.5% 34.9% 43.3% 27.3% 33.0% 30.3% Agg (Sex) 53.0% 30.6% 26.1% 56.4% 23.6% 35.6% 45.9% Violent Not Agg (No Sex) 28.5% 20.8% 31.2% 31.0% 23.8% 22.6% 22.9% Not Agg (Sex) 42.9% 14.6% 19.1% 25.0% 22.2% 20.3% 34.0% Nonviolent (No Sex) 32.6% 28.6% 48.6% 36.5% 33.0% 44.7% 25.3% TOTAL 33.8% 27.3% 42.2% 36.2% 29.8% 38.1% 25.9% January, 2018 PAROLE ELIGIBILITY IN TEXAS: My office receives numerous telephone calls from the loved ones of inmates in Texas prisons requesting my assistance. Too often, I must refuse representation of the inmate because of misunderstanding of the term parole eligibility. Repeatedly, I am contacted too late to be able to assist the inmate. During the course of representing an inmate I must conduct an investigation, gather evidence, review the evidence and prepare a parole package that might be as large as 30-40 pages which has to be filed in a timely manner as required by the Board. I also must also prepare a compelling argument to present to the Board. Most people who go to the TDCJ-ID Website and look up an inmate see a date indicating parole eligibility and believe it is a hearing date. This is wrong! Parole eligibility means any time after this date the inmate can be released from prison if the Parole Board receives sufficient evidence to be convinced the inmate deserves to be released and is no longer a threat to society. Under Texas Parole Board rules and policy, the Parole Board may receive an inmate’s file as early as 60-days before the parole eligibility date and upon receiving the file will review any evidence contained in the file and then determine if the inmate should remain incarcerated or be released. Board rules allow all inmates being considered for parole to be interviewed by parole officials approximately six (6) months before the parole eligibility date for a first review and four (4) months before additional next review dates. The Board rules require that the parole package MUST be filed on or before the 60-day voting window or else they do not even have to look at the package; therefore, I must be hired several months before that so I can have the needed time to perform the needed work, gather the information and documents needed to prepare a substantial package and submit it on time as required by the Board. Time is limited and there is no time to waste. The more time I have to work on a file, the better. Do not wait. It is my advice not to retain an attorney who will accept representing an inmate before the Parole Board who does not have sufficient time to investigate, evaluate, prepare a substantial parole package and prepare a compelling argument for the Parole Board. There are attorneys who have a form and all they do is remove the name of their last client from the form and insert their new client’s name into the form. It has been my experience this type of representation does not change a Parole Board Member’s mind about an inmate. If the inmate is released after such a form is submitted, that inmate would probably have been released anyway. Under Texas law, the burden is upon the inmate to find the evidence, produce the evidence, and convince the Parole Board to grant an inmate parole from prison. If there is no evidence in the file showing the inmate has changed, has confronted whatever has caused him/her to commit crimes, and convince the Parole Board the inmate is no longer a threat to society (a threat to society can be further theft cases for example, it does not necessarily have to be any type of violent crime) then the Parole Board must deny the inmate release from prison. Should the Parole Board decide not to release an inmate to parole they then determine when they would be willing to review the inmate again. While most cases have a one-year set-off before they are reviewed again by the Parole Board, there are other cases that receive a 5 or 10-year set-off, depending on the crime. It is my advice to contact a good attorney at least a minimum of 8-9 months before the next parole eligibility date. Contrary, to most inmate’s beliefs, the present Parole Board is probably the most enlightened group of individuals I have dealt with in the 30-years I have been working as a parole attorney. I have found every Parole Board Member is willing to consider releasing someone to parole when they are given evidence they can believe in, a plan that they believe will work, and have faith in the inmate not committing new crimes. The problem lies in putting the information together in such a way that the Parole Board feels comfortable releasing someone. If the Parole Board has any doubt the individual will go back to committing crimes, then they will place them into the 66 2/3% category who are not released to parole. It is the inmate’s problem and burden to come up with the evidence to present to the Parole Board that will convince them to release the inmate to parole. If the inmate does not do that, then he/she can expect to be denied parole and receive a set-off. Not too many years ago, California and Texas were in a contest to see how many people could be sent to prison. I believe at one time the prison population in the state of Texas reached almost 170,000 inmates but now the prison population is approximately 150,000 to 155,000. The present release rate of 33 1/3% is much better than the 14% release rate I dealt with some 30-years ago. Click here to see current Texas Board of Pardons & Parole Chart (Board Offices / Unit Assignments) RUMORS: (1) There is a certain segment of the inmate population that must believe in the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus. I have consistently explained there has not been a change in the law regarding 3g offenses or those other offenses that are not listed under 3g, but require one-half of the sentence to be served day for day. If you are charged with one of these offenses you must serve one-half of your sentence, day for day, before you are eligible for parole. There has not been a change in this law by the Texas Legislature either in the last legislature session in 2017 or any other legislative session. The fact the Texas Legislature continues to designate crimes that require an inmate to serve at least one-half of the sentence before becoming eligible for parole, indicates they are not interested in reducing parole eligibility requirements for inmates. If you look at the Texas Legislature you can understand why there is very little possibility of any reduction in parole eligibility. The Governor of the state of Texas is a Republican, the Lieutenant Governor is a Republican, the majority of both the House and Senate are Republicans. Republicans do not have a reputation of being interested in helping people who have been convicted of a crime. So, when you hear one of these inmates tell you the Release Fairy has informed them of some change in the legislature that benefits the inmate you should be extremely skeptical. (2) There is a persistent rumor, again the Release Fairy has told someone, the prisons are overcrowded, and the Parole Board must release inmates. The prisons are not overcrowded. There are empty beds and TDCJ is in the process of closing 3 prisons. The parole release rate has not varied very much in the last 6-years. Presently, the Parole Board is releasing approximately 33 1/3% of the inmates who apply for parole and 40% of the inmates who are up for Discretionary Mandatory Review. While the release rate has come a long way from the 14% release rate I had to deal with when I 1st became active in representing inmates before the Parole Board some 30-years ago, it still is not great. There have been some changes in Board Members and Commissioners and some units have been placed under different Boards. For your reference, please find attached a chart of the current Parole Board Members and Commissioners, the Boards they are assigned to and the units assigned to the Boards. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you desire my legal assistance with release to parole. June, 2017 While the Texas Legislature will go in to special session it will not be dealing with any laws affecting criminal justice or the prison system. The following addresses the new laws that may affect the inmate population and rumors that are circulating through TDCJ. INMATE FEDERAL LAWSUIT: The lawsuit filed by the inmates from the Pack Unit as well as other units complaining the “cooling mechanisms” of fans, showers, cool drinking water won’t protect inmates from the dangers of extreme heat and being locked inside prisons with high humidity and temperatures topping 100°. One of the witnesses stated he was greeted when he entered prison with, “ Welcome to hell.” The inmates and their attorneys argue this is a violation of the Constitution in that it is cruel and unusual punishment to house inmates in conditions where the temperature often exceeds 100° during the hottest months of the year. The case the case went over two weeks in trial in Federal Judge Kenneth Ellison’s court. As of June 30, 2017 all sides hae rested and the Judge announced he will have a decision by July 30, 2017. Whoever loses has already indicated they will appeal the case to the United States Supreme Court. To stop the rumors there is no verdict or opinion from the judge at this time and when there is it will be appealed. It will then take approximately 2-3 years before there will be a final decision from one of the appellate courts or the Supreme Court of the United States. If you don’t want to bake in Texas heat for the next 2-3 years I would advise you to do your best to get paroled out of the oven. Don’t wait until next year when the temperature starts climbing to over 100° to try to hire an attorney to represent you. It will be too late then. GOOD NEWS FOR PAROLEES: As the United States unemployment falls to the lowest levels in decades, people with criminal convictions on their resume are getting 2nd looks by employers trying to fill vacancies currently standing at near record levels. Homebuilders are recruiting inmates who have taken carpentry and plumbing classes. Other employers are looking for trained welders, air conditioning repairmen, truck drivers, as well as computer operators and repairmen. The Prison Entrepreneurship Program (PEP) graduates earn a certificate in entrepreneurship from the Baylor University Hankamer School of Business and graduates find jobs within 90-days of release. I have been representing inmates before the parole board for some 30-years and this is the best job opportunity I have seen for my clients. BAD NEWS FOR INMATES: Previously, President Obama’s appointee to the Federal Communications Commission imposed rate caps on prison phone privileges, but President Trump appointed the current Federal Communication Commissioner, Ajit Pai who instructed the commission lawyers to drop their court defense of the prison phone caps. On June 13, 2017, a three-judge federal panel issued an order siding with the Prison Phone Company Global Tel-Link who can now set any rate approved by the state so long as the phone calls are within the state and not over state lines. This ruling also appears to allow Securus and Global to increase so-called “ancillary fees”. SCAM ON INMATES: It is my understanding there is a “law firm” telling inmates it can contact the district attorney that prosecuted the inmate and the judge that sentenced the inmate and get them to agree to a” time cut” and the inmate would then be released from prison. For a “time cut” to occur, two of the following must agree to reduce down the sentence: the sheriff of the county where the incident took place, the judge who sentenced the inmate, and/or the district attorney of the county where the incident occurred. If by some miracle two of the three agree, the application with the letters must be sent to the parole board where three-fourths of the parole board must agree to the reduction, and if by some miracle that occurs, the application will then be sent to the Governor of the State of Texas who at his discretion may agree or disagree to the reduction in sentence recommended by everyone else. As you can see, a “time cut” is considerably more complex than simply getting the judge and the district attorney to agree to reduce down the sentence. Therefore, if you are contacted by such a “law firm” and told the “law firm” can reduce your sentence by having the District Attorney and Judge agree, you need to know it is a scam. RUMORS: (1)There is a rumor circulating about the release of all inmates in prison that are illegal aliens prior to their parole eligibility date. The rumor is that President Trump has ordered every illegal alien deported. While it is true President Trump is enforcing Immigration Laws on illegal aliens residing in the United States, there is no law that allows the President of the United States to order the release of state prisoners so they can be deported. United State Presidents can only effect federal laws. All inmates who are illegal aliens in Texas prisons still must go through the parole process and convince the parole board to grant them parole before they can be picked up by ICE and deported back to their country of origin. FALSE. No such Presidential Order Exists. (2) The Inmate Rumor Mill has now decided all bills not passed by the Texas Legislature during the regular 140-day regular session will now be brought up in the Special Session set for July. FALSE. Only the governor can designate what will be addressed in the special session and no criminal justice bills were designated by the governor. (3) While it is true that the Bartlett State Jail, Bridgeport Transfer Facility, Ware Transfer Facility, Texas Intermediate Sanction Facility and the Mineral Wells Pre-Parole Transfer Facility are to be closed sometime after September 2017, the rumor circulating that those inmates who are being held in those facilities will be released from prison because of overcrowding is FALSE. In an interview with Jason Clark, TDCJ spokesman stated those offenders will be transferred to facilities with existing capacity in the coming months. There is NO overcrowding in the Texas prison system at this time. Simple logic would show the prison system is not overcrowded because the Legislature is shutting down four prisons. NEW LAWS: Reminder To All Inmates: Other than the Special Texas Legislature Session which will begin in July 2017 and deal with budget problems, the Texas Legislature will not meet again until January 2019. The Texas Legislature meets for 140-days every 2-years. There will be no new laws until 2019. HB 2120 – this bill dealt with 3g offenders accruing good time credits toward their parole eligibility. This bill never made it out of committee and therefore never became law. This is NOT a Law. HB 1274 – relating to the release of certain inmates convicted of an offense when they were under the age of 18 by changing the parole eligibility date. This bill was passed out of committee and went to the Legislature, but the legislative session ended before it was brought to a floor vote. This is NOT a Law. HB 122 – was a bill proposing to raise the age when a juvenile could be tried as an adult. This bill never got out of committee. This is NOT a Law. HB 3872 – where previous DNA testing was subject to faulty testing by the State of Texas a convicted person may apply for a writ of habeas corpus containing specific facts indicating the person previously filed a motion for forensic DNA testing of evidence that was denied because of a negative finding and the evidence had not been presented at the person’s trial and the person would not have been convicted. This became law immediately. HB 3019 – relating to the prosecution for the offense of injury to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual if the person is an owner, operator, employee of a group home, nursing facility, assisted living facility, boarding home facility, intermediate care facility for persons with intellectual our development disability or other institution care facilities who intentionally, knowingly, recklessly or with criminal negligence by omission causes serious bodily injury, serious mental deficiency, impairment, or injury or bodily injury. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. HB 2908 – increases the punishment for an offense committed against a person because of bias or prejudice on the basis of service as a peace officer, the property of a peace officer was damaged. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. HB 2888 – directs the parole board to identify any classes or programs the board intends to require the inmate to complete before releasing the inmate to parole. The inmate shall be provided with this list of classes and programs. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. HB 2671 – changes the status of various controlled substances moving some from one penalty group to another penalty group. This bill is very technical and extremely voluminous. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. HB 2529 – creates a presumption that certain conduct constitutes force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of the offense of trafficking of persons. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. HB 1819 – a person commits an offense if the person intentionally or knowingly possesses, manufactures, transports, repairs, or sells an explosive weapon, machine gun, or short-barreled firearm, knuckles, armor piercing ammunition, chemical dispensing device, zip gun, or firearm silencer unless the firearm silencer is classified as a curio art relic and the actor is in compliance with federal law. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. HB 1178 – increases the punishment for burglary and theft of controlled substances. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. HB 1111 – when a parole panel designates an individual cannot go within a child safety zone as a condition of parole, this does not apply while the releasee is traveling directly en route on a public or private roadway between locations where the releasee has legitimate business. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. HB 553 – this sets up a task force to conduct an ongoing comprehensive review to identify opportunities for the award of high school credits, college credits or combination of both to assist in the establishment of new courses for inmates. This must be completed within 4 years and submitted to the governor and legislature to assist them in creating new courses for the inmate population. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. HB 351 – should a judge impose a fine and cost on a defendant, the judge may require the entire fine and cost be paid at sentencing, at a later date, or at designated intervals. If the judge imposes a fine and cost and determines that the defendant has insufficient resources or income to pay the fine and cost, the judge may require the defendant to discharge all or part of the fine and cost by performing community service. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. HB 239 – requires a report on the confinement of pregnant inmates in facilities operated by or under contract with TDCJ and this report will be submitted no later than December 1, 2018 to the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Speaker of the House of Representatives and standing committees to be reviewed as a possible change in procedure. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. HB 238 – the creation of records for the DNA database increases the number of felony crimes in which DNA material may be acquired by the state. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. HB 34 – this is a rather detailed law dealing with how the State Attorney can deal with a jailhouse informants, custodial interrogation, including questions asked at booking, electronic recordings as well as any questions which are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. SB 1576 – a very long and detailed law setting out the civil commitment of sexually violent predators and the operation of the Texas Civil Commitment Office. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. SB 1322 – deals with increasing the punishment for the offense of promotion of child pornography if there is a previous conviction, the child depicted in the visual material was younger than 14 years of age. This law is in effect September 1, 2017. SB 1250 – deals with the admissibility of certain evidence in the prosecution of family violence cases. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. SB 998 – deals with expanding the statute of limitation on murder, manslaughter, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, exploitation of a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual, continuous sexual assault of a child, indecency with a child, leaving the scene of an accident, trafficking of persons, continuous trafficking of persons, compelling prostitution, various theft offenses, forgery money laundering, credit card or debit card abuse, Medicaid fraud, and injury to a child. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. SB 343 – sets a new crime for improper sexual activity with a person under the supervision of a community supervision and/or corrections department. Any employee of the Texas Department of Criminal justice, Texas Juvenile Justice Department, a juvenile facility, a local juvenile probation department, a community supervision, a corrections department who commits an offense of engaging in sexual contact, sexual intercourse, or deviant sexual intercourse with an individual who the employee knows is under the supervision of the State of Texas would be charged with a felony. This law goes into effect September 1, 2017. ***MY ATTORNEY REPRESENTATION & WHY I MUST BE HIRED A LONG TIME BEFORE THE ELIGIBILITY DATE:*** Every inmate is eventually going to be reviewed by the Board. If you want to hire me, I must have time to perform my job. I must be hired a long time before the inmates eligibility date so I can do what needs to be done such as help prepare an inmate to be a good candidate for release to parole, gather the needed information and prepare the written documentation to be submitted to the Board, and to argue in behalf of my client before the Board if granted an appearance all of this needs to be done so I can present this information to the Parole Board before the procedural hurdles and time-fines stop the evidence from being accepted by the Board. You should hire me before you go into to review. (Versión en Español) March, 2017 RUMORS: Once again, the rumor-mongers of TDCJ are waging their campaign that the Legislature has changed a law. Once again, I am informing the inmate population: The Texas Legislature does meet this year, but no one will know whether there will be any new laws affecting the inmate population until at least June 2017. Just because a Bill (a suggestion by one of the Legislatures for a new law) is submitted does not mean the Bill will become law. There is a procedure for a Bill to become law and it is time consuming. Once a Bill is submitted by either a State Legislature or State Senator the Bill is assigned to a committee. Most Bills dealing with criminal matters must be submitted to the Criminal Justice Committee or Corrections Committee. There must be a vote of the majority of the Committee Members to move the Bill out of the Committee to the floor of the State Legislature. Once the Bill has been submitted to the floor it must pass both houses (the Senate and the House) by a majority of the Members. Then the Bill is sent to the Governor of the State of Texas. He must sign the Legislation within 90-days or it automatically dies and is not law. Therefore, I will not know until June 2017 if any of the Bills will become law. (1) Rumor: Reduction in one-half law for 3g offenders before eligible for parole. FALSE. There has been no change in the law affecting 3g offenders. 3g offenders still must serve one-half of their sentence before they are eligible for parole. As of the date of this letter there has not been any Bill submitted to either the Criminal Justice Committee or Corrections Committee concerning this issue. Should you hear a rumor otherwise indicating there has been a reduction in the one-half rule, know it is FALSE. In fact, the Legislature keeps ADDING new crimes requiring inmates to serve a minimum of one-half of their sentence. As previously indicated in my last newsletter, the Legislature is now adding crimes where NO parole will be available and inmates must serve every day of their sentence. When I began representing inmates before the Board around 30-years ago, there were only Aggravated Assault, Murder, Aggravated Kidnaping, Aggravated Sexual Assault, Aggravated Robbery and Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child convictions that an inmate would have to serve one-half of their sentence on before becoming eligible for parole. Now there are approximately 15 more crimes in addition to the original 5 crimes that require an inmate to serve one-half of their sentence before becoming eligible for parole. (2) Rumor: If you are an undocumented immigrant and you are in prison, the Parole Board will release you and send you back to your country of origin because Donald Trump plans to start deporting immigrants with criminal records. FALSE! This has been a rumor for over 20-years and it has not occurred yet. This path has always been opposed by the Board Members who disagree with releasing convicts before they have proven they will get their lives together and stop committing crimes whether in the United States or their country of origin, especially if the Board Members believe the inmate will be deported and then return here to commit new crimes. SCAMS: (1) A very realistic document is circulating through the prison system from the Department of Assistance and Rehabilitation Program. It claims you have 30-days from the date of your release to receive $1,200 toward the down-payment on a work vehicle, $400 for casual clothes and shoes, $500 for tools and $368 for every year you served in prison. All this information is available in a “hand-book” that you can purchase for the nominal fee of $53 (amount varies) and then there is the name and address of who to send your money to in order to acquire this wonderful book full of information allowing you to receive money. Please DO NOT fall for this scam. This scam has been circulating through the prison system for over 10-years that I know of and not one person has ever received a penny from purchasing this $53 book. (2) Once again there is a letter circulating through the system inviting inmates to join a “program” to be represented by the “law firm” in writ of habeas corpus matters for the sum of $150. Please be advised this is nothing but a scam. The filing fee to file a writ of habeas corpus is at least $150. Therefore, how is this “law firm” able to pay its lawyers, secretaries, West Law Computer lease, rent and other expenses out of thin air or maybe the Tooth Fairy has been leaving money under their pillow to allow the firm and its employees to live and operate on. BEWARE of this scam. PAROLE BOARD INFORMATION: The following are the 2016 denial rates by Parole Board Members: Board Member David Gutierrez of the Gatesville Board is the head of the Parole Board and only votes in limited situations, therefore he is not listed as his denial rate is based on his total vote on approximately 500 inmate files when the average Member votes 2,200 files. For those who have followed my newsletters over the years, I have always pointed out that the Angleton Board has maintained the highest release rate among the various Parole Boards. This is no longer true as there is now a new Board with a higher release rate than Angleton. Amarillo Board James W. LaFavers 53.0% Marsha Moberley 61.2% Raymond Gonzalez 65.8% Overall Denial Rate 60.0% Angleton Board Cynthia Tauss 64.3% Lynn Ruzicka 66.7% Ira Evans 76.0% Overall Denial Rate 69.0% Austin Board Ed Robertson 46.5% Troy Fox 63.9% Elvis Hightower 63.6% Overall Denial Rate 58.0% Gatesville Board Lee Ann Massingill 59.2% Roel Tejada 59.3% Overall Denial Rate 59.2% Huntsville Board Fred Rangel 66.6% Wanda Saliagas 76.7% Roy Garcia 72.8% Overall Denial Rate 72.0% Palestine Board Michelle Skyrme 68.5% James Kiel 68.7% James Hensarling 61.9% Overall Denial Rate 63.3% San Antonio Board Fred Solis 59.9% Charles Speier 56.0% Anthony Ramirez 70.7% Overall Denial Rate 62.2% ***MY ATTORNEY REPRESENTATION & WHY I MUST BE HIRED A LONG TIME BEFORE THE ELIGIBILITY DATE:*** Every inmate is eventually going to be reviewed by the Board. If you want to hire me, I must have time to perform my job. You need to hire me before your file is in review. Under Board rules the Parole Board can and often does receive an inmate’s file 60-days prior to the Parole Eligibility date (Parole Eligibility date is not your hearing date, it is the date you become eligible for parole review) and upon receiving the file, the parole panel can vote the inmate’s case. A parole package needs to be submitted prior to that date. I do not prepare a three-page form letter (taking the last client’s name out and inserting a new client’s name in as some “Parole Attorneys” do). I need time to investigate, review the evidence gathered, evaluate that evidence and prepare a parole package which can be as much as 30 to 40 pages. Then, I must request an Attorney Appearance date and prepare for the presentation of my arguments to the Parole Member. Therefore, waiting to hire me only a few months prior to the eligibility date is not a sufficient time frame for me to do the job needed to convince the Board to release you to parole. If you believe a 3-page form letter will change the Parole Board’s mind about who you are and what you have become, then you are sadly mistaken. If you are released after such a form letter is filed, you were more than likely going to be released anyway. You need to get realistic. If you are charged with a serious crime such as any type of assault, murder, manslaughter then you should expect to be protected by the victim, victim’s family, or the District Attorney’s Office. I am seeing more and more victims and families hiring attorneys to go before the Board to protest an inmate’s release. This is especially true in theft cases and intoxicated manslaughter cases. Multiple DWI’s are being protested by the District Attorney’s Office. You will need a very strong presentation and Parole Package and a 3-page form will not do much persuading. Prison budget plight grows (A Houston Chronicle Article): For those families hoping for some help from this legislature this article may hold out some hope the Board of Pardons and Paroles may increase the release rate for the next two years. This may be the best time to put forth a strong argument as to why the Parole Board should release the inmate. The burden is still on the inmate to prove the he/she should be released. The requirement the Board must believe there is a reasonable chance for the inmate to become a productive citizen and give up his/ her past life style of drugs and criminal behavior will still be required to gain release. The inmate still must convince the Board he/she will change and not be coming back to prison on new criminal charges to gain parole. There will not be any wholesale releases from prison just because there may be budget problems, instead the Board may now consider other factors when hearing arguments and reading the Parole Package at the Parole Board Appearance to determine if an inmate will be released to parole. Please understand the prison budget is still being put together by the legislature and there is a possibility more money may be allocated from other state programs to reduce the shortfall in the prison budget. $421M needed for upgrades, inmate care. By the numbers: $6.7 billion Budget for running Texas prisons and corrections programs for two years. 147,000 Number of inmates, of whom 46 percent are over 55. $247 million Cost of prisoner’s health care for two years. $55.6 million Needed for prison repairs and renovations. AUSTIN – State lawmakers may consider shuttering another prison and paroling some older, infirm inmates to nursing homes in a bid to shift more than $400 million in funding toward rising health care costs and much-needed repairs and upgrades to Texas an aging corrections facility’s. The state already is poised to spend more than $6.7 billion over the next two years for prisons and corrections programs. But with the Legislature looking at the tightest state budget in years, lawmakers quietly are looking for ways to save $421 million in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice operations to cover surging costs associated with overseeing the state’s 147,000 convicts. Topping the list is $247 million to pay the costs of convict’s health care during the next two years, including facilities, doctors, equipment and medicines. Much of that increased cost for care is needed to provide health care to an aging prison population, said Bryan Collier, executive director of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Forty-six percent of the states convicts are over age 55, a group that accounts for 40 percent of expensive hospital visits, officials said. To help cover those growing costs, Collier said officials are looking to increase the co-pay amount charged to convicts for health care from $100 to $200 a year. Thousands of those convicts, however, are indigent and cannot afford to pay for their care. Officials said Monday that another state prison could be shuttered to save cash, the fifth in six years in a state that once went more than a century without closing one. Just as Texas became a national model 10 years ago, for funding new treatment programs to cut recidivism rather than build new prisons, legislative leaders predict the current budget crisis could give birth to new innovation and savings in the largest state prison system in the United States. In one respect, it’s good to have a tight budget session like this one, because when I look at the little bitty kids who are facing cuts in their therapy, it makes me realize that we need to tighten up every way, look for every efficiency in our criminal justice programs that we can find” said House Corrections Committee Chairman James White, a Hillister Republican whose East Texas district east of Huntsville is dotted with prisons. That’s exactly what we’re going to do. Senate Criminal Justice Committee Chairman John Whitmire, a Houston Democrat who has overseen prison operations for more than two decades, agreed. He and Senate leaders are pushing for changes in prison operations to make the state’s corrections agency “one of the largest state agencies, with more than 35,000 employees” operate more efficiently. “I want to move them from a 1950s operations model to a 2017 model, he said. We have thousands of empty beds at 109 state prisons. You shut some prisons, mothball some and consolidate the inmates. Then reinvest some of the money you save in treatment programs that save even more. The savings could be very significant. Dire need Collier said agency officials are open to discussing opportunities for saving money. For example, he said that in addition to shuttering a downtown Houston parole lockup last December to save $13 million, officials are considering whether to combine two side-by-side prison units in Colorado City, in West Texas, to save millions more. While the Senate and House draft budgets fund current prison operations, Collier said they come up $421 million short to pay for items that are fundamentally important to the operations of the agency. In addition to the rising costs of prison care, another $55.6 million is needed â€” but not included in either chambers initial budget” for renovations and repairs to Texas prisons, some of which are more than 100 years old and are in dire need of new roofs, fire alarm systems, leaky water systems, security fencing and lighting upgrades. On the list is the main prison hospital in Galveston, which officials say needs $22 million in repairs. The department says it also needs another $19 million to upgrade its 40-year-old mainframe computer system, $15.4 million for 1,000 additional substance-abuse treatment beds, and $10 million for a video surveillance system in three maximum-security prisons. To cover those costs, Senate budget writers say they are looking at whether prisons can be closed or consolidated in places where two units are located adjacent to each other. Whitmire said many of the oldest prisons are the most expensive to operate, such as the Jester 1 and Vance units in Richmond and the Gatesville, Hilltop and Mountain View units in Gatesville. Look at everything Lawmakers in both the Senate and House confirmed they also are looking at whether elderly and infirm convicts now housed in prisons at sole expense to the state, and who pose no threat to the public, could be paroled to nursing homes or outside living centers so their health care costs can be covered by federal programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. Obviously, our primary focus still must be public safety. If you commit a serious crime, we have a bed for you, Whitmire said. But I think we are at a time where, when we have such a tight budget, (that) we have an opportunity to look at how we operate our criminal justice system and take the next step to a more efficient and better system. Senate Finance Committee Chair Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound, echoed the sentiment. Her orders to Whitmire and Sen. Charles Schwertner, a Georgetown Republican who heads a work group looking to pare down correctional health care costs: Look at everything. In the House, members of the budget-writing Appropriations Committee appear to be on the same page. At a Monday hearing where Collier discussed the agency’s budget needs for the next two years, White and other lawmakers said they are intent on finding new efficiencies for the nation’s largest state prison system. February, 2017 RUMORS: Once again, the rumor-mongers of TDCJ are waging their campaign that the Legislature has changed a law. Once again, I am informing the inmate population: The Texas Legislature does meet this year, but no one will know whether there will be any new laws affecting the inmate population until at least June 2017. Just because a Bill (a suggestion by one of the Legislatures for a new law) is submitted does not mean the Bill will become law. There is a procedure for a Bill to become law and it is time consuming. Once a Bill is submitted by either a State Legislature or State Senator the Bill is assigned to a committee. Most Bills dealing with criminal matters must be submitted to the Criminal Justice Committee or Corrections Committee. There must be a vote of the majority of the Committee Members to move the Bill out of the Committee to the floor of the State Legislature. Once the Bill has been submitted to the floor it must pass both houses (the Senate and the House) by a majority of the Members. Then the Bill is sent to the Governor of the State of Texas. He must sign the Legislation within 90-days or it automatically dies and is not law. Therefore, I will not know until June 2017 if any of the Bills will become law. (1) Rumor: Reduction in one-half law for 3g offenders before eligible for parole. FALSE. There has been no change in the law affecting 3g offenders. 3g offenders still must serve one-half of their sentence before they are eligible for parole. As of the date of this letter there has not been any Bill submitted to either the Criminal Justice Committee or Corrections Committee concerning this issue. Should you hear a rumor otherwise indicating there has been a reduction in the one-half rule, know it is FALSE. In fact, the Legislature keeps ADDING new crimes requiring inmates to serve a minimum of one-half of their sentence. As previously indicated in my last newsletter, the Legislature is now adding crimes where NO parole will be available and inmates must serve every day of their sentence. When I began representing inmates before the Board around 30-years ago, there were only Aggravated Assault, Murder, Aggravated Kidnaping, Aggravated Sexual Assault, Aggravated Robbery and Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child convictions that an inmate would have to serve one-half of their sentence on before becoming eligible for parole. Now there are approximately 15 more crimes in addition to the original 5 crimes that require an inmate to serve one-half of their sentence before becoming eligible for parole. (2) Rumor: If you are an undocumented immigrant and you are in prison, the Parole Board will release you and send you back to your country of origin because Donald Trump plans to start deporting immigrants with criminal records. FALSE! This has been a rumor for over 20-years and it has not occurred yet. This path has always been opposed by the Board Members who disagree with releasing convicts before they have proven they will get their lives together and stop committing crimes whether in the United States or their country of origin, especially if the Board Members believe the inmate will be deported and then return here to commit new crimes. SCAMS: (1) A very realistic document is circulating through the prison system from the Department of Assistance and Rehabilitation Program. It claims you have 30-days from the date of your release to receive $1,200 toward the down-payment on a work vehicle, $400 for casual clothes and shoes, $500 for tools and $368 for every year you served in prison. All this information is available in a “hand-book” that you can purchase for the nominal fee of $53 (amount varies) and then there is the name and address of who to send your money to in order to acquire this wonderful book full of information allowing you to receive money. Please DO NOT fall for this scam. This scam has been circulating through the prison system for over 10-years that I know of and not one person has ever received a penny from purchasing this $53 book. (2) Once again there is a letter circulating through the system inviting inmates to join a “program” to be represented by the “law firm” in writ of habeas corpus matters for the sum of $150. Please be advised this is nothing but a scam. The filing fee to file a writ of habeas corpus is at least $150. Therefore, how is this “law firm” able to pay its lawyers, secretaries, West Law Computer lease, rent and other expenses out of thin air or maybe the Tooth Fairy has been leaving money under their pillow to allow the firm and its employees to live and operate on. BEWARE of this scam. PAROLE BOARD INFORMATION: The following are the 2016 denial rates by Parole Board Members: Board Member David Gutierrez of the Gatesville Board is the head of the Parole Board and only votes in limited situations, therefore he is not listed as his denial rate is based on his total vote on approximately 500 inmate files when the average Member votes 2,200 files. For those who have followed my newsletters over the years, I have always pointed out that the Angleton Board has maintained the highest release rate among the various Parole Boards. This is no longer true as there is now a new Board with a higher release rate than Angleton. Amarillo Board James W. LaFavers 53.0% Marsha Moberley 61.2% Raymond Gonzalez 65.8% Overall Denial Rate 60.0% Angleton Board Cynthia Tauss 64.3% Lynn Ruzicka 66.7% Ira Evans 76.0% Overall Denial Rate 69.0% Austin Board Ed Robertson 46.5% Troy Fox 63.9% Elvis Hightower 63.6% Overall Denial Rate 58.0% Gatesville Board Lee Ann Massingill 59.2% Roel Tejada 59.3% Overall Denial Rate 59.2% Huntsville Board Fred Rangel 66.6% Wanda Saliagas 76.7% Roy Garcia 72.8% Overall Denial Rate 72.0% Palestine Board Michelle Skyrme 68.5% James Kiel 68.7% James Hensarling 61.9% Overall Denial Rate 63.3% San Antonio Board Fred Solis 59.9% Charles Speier 56.0% Anthony Ramirez 70.7% Overall Denial Rate 62.2% ***MY ATTORNEY REPRESENTATION & WHY I MUST BE HIRED A LONG TIME BEFORE THE ELIGIBILITY DATE:*** Every inmate is eventually going to be reviewed by the Board. If you want to hire me, I must have time to perform my job. You need to hire me before your file is in review. Under Board rules the Parole Board can and often does receive an inmate’s file 60-days prior to the Parole Eligibility date (Parole Eligibility date is not your hearing date, it is the date you become eligible for parole review) and upon receiving the file, the parole panel can vote the inmate’s case. A parole package needs to be submitted prior to that date. I do not prepare a three-page form letter (taking the last client’s name out and inserting a new client’s name in as some “Parole Attorneys” do). I need time to investigate, review the evidence gathered, evaluate that evidence and prepare a parole package which can be as much as 30 to 40 pages. Then, I must request an Attorney Appearance date and prepare for the presentation of my arguments to the Parole Member. Therefore, waiting to hire me only a few months prior to the eligibility date is not a sufficient time frame for me to do the job needed to convince the Board to release you to parole. May, 2016 House Bill 1914 and Parole Board Policy May 2016: There is now some good news to report. In 2015 the Board implemented procedures authorizing the Board Members to set a next review date of either 5,7, or 10 years in the future for those cases that were denied parole… Numerous inmates refuse to believe my last newsletter was correct about House Bill 1914. I received many telephone calls from anguished mothers, fathers, girlfriends, and other loved ones who have discovered their family member will not be seen by the parole board for at least 5 years and in some situations I have received telephone calls were they were denied parole and received a 10 year set-off. Once the parole board has made their decision there is no appeal. The Parole Board is applying House Bill 1914 retroactively to all capital life sentences and Aggravated Sexual Assault cases. There is now some good news to report. In 2015 the Board implemented procedures authorizing the Board Members to set a next review date of either 5,7, or 10 years in the future for those cases that were denied parole. The Board began applying those set offs retroactively. On April 20, 2016 the Parole Board met for the Board’s quarterly meeting and the Board voted to include the option of a 3 year set off in addition to the previously imposed 5, 7, and 10 year set off options in HB-1941 cases. Now the Board Members can give a 3, 5, 7, or 10 year set off should the Board Members deny parole on a capital life case or an Aggravated Sexual Assault case. March, 2016 TIME CALCULATIONS FOR FIRST PAROLE REVIEW AS OF SEPTEMBER 2015: As I have often written in my newsletters the Texas Legislature only meets every 2-years. The Texas Legislature will not meet again until 2017. The following eligibility for release chart is based on laws currently in effect in 2016. A person being held in county jail or custody will receive credit for his/her time in custody toward his/her parole eligibility date. For example. . . an inmate has been in custody for 6-months in a county facility prior to being sentenced to a 10-year sentence. The inmate would be eligible for parole (if the case is not a 3g offense) in 1-year 2-months and 8-days. The 6-months should be subtracted from the 1-year and 2-months parole eligibility date, leaving a parole eligibility date of approximately 8-months from the date of sentencing. The following is a parole and discretionary mandatory supervision eligibility chart, remember the parole board presently is placing inmates into parole review six-months in advance of these calculated times and the parole board is presently voting cases as early as three-months before the parole eligibility date, in other words you need to hire me well in advance of the computed parole eligibility date: PAROLE DISCRETIONARY MANDATORY Yrs. 3g Offenses All Other Offenses 3g/508.149 Offenses All Other Offenses 1 N/A 1 mos 13 days N/A 5 mos 21 days 2 N/A 2 mos 25 days N/A 11 mos 8 days 3 2 yrs 4 mos 8 days N/A 1 yr 5 mos 2 days 4 2 yrs 5 mos 21 days N/A 1 yr 10 mos 22 days 5 2 yrs 6 mos 7 mos 3 days N/A 2 yrs 4 mos 12 days 6 3 yrs 8 mos 15 days N/A 2 yrs 10 mos 3 days 7 3 yrs 6 mos 10 mos 0 days N/A 3 yrs 3 mos 20 days 8 4 yrs 11 mos 8 days N/A 3 yrs 9 mos 16 days 9 4 yrs 6 mos 1 yr 0 mos 24 days N/A 7 yrs 3 mos 4 days 10 5 yrs I yr 2 mos 8 days N/A 4 yrs 8 mos 24 days 11 5 yrs 6 mos 1 yr 9 mos 9 days N/A 6 yrs 1 mos 6 days 15 7 yrs 6 mos 2 yr 1 mos 20 days N/A 7 yrs 1 mos 6 days 20 10 yrs 2 yrs 4 mos 12 days N/A 9 yrs 5 mos 18 days 25 12 yrs 6 mos 2 yrs 11 mos 15 days N/A 11 yrs 10 mos 30 15 yrs 3 yrs 6 mos 18 days N/A 14 yrs 2 mos 12 days 35 17 yrs 6 mos 4 yrs 1 mos 21 days N/A 16 yr 6 mos 24 days 40 20 yrs 4 yrs 9 mos N/A 18 yr 11 mos 6 days 45 22 yrs 6 mos 5 yrs 4 mos 3 days N/A 21 yrs 3 mos 18 days 50 25 yrs 5 yrs 11 mos 8 days N/A 23 yrs 8 mos 55 27 yrs 6 mos 6 yrs 6 mos 11 days N/A 26 yrs 12 days 60 30 yrs 7 yrs 1 mos 15 days N/A 28 yrs 4 mos 24 days LIFE 30 yrs 7 yrs 1 mos 15 days N/A N/A Parole eligibility is based on calendar time. The inmates convicted of 3g offenses are not eligible for mandatory supervision. Any 3g offense committed on or after September 1, 1993 requires an inmate to serve a minimum of one-half of the total sentence to become parole eligible. The following is the current listing of 3g offenses for 2016: Aggravated Assault – Mandatory minimum or 2-years any time over two years is computed at ½ rule Aggravated Sexual Assault Aggravated Kidnapping Aggravated Robbery Use of a Child to Commit Drug Offense 1st Degree Felony Injury of a Child Resulting In Serious Bodily Injury Sexual Performance By a Child 1st Degree Criminal Solicitation Compelling Prostitution Trafficking Of Persons 1st Degree Burglary Of habitation With Intent To Commit Certain Sexual Offenses Affirmative Finding Of Deadly Weapon Continuous Trafficking of Persons Engaging in Organized Criminal Activity Directing Activities of Criminal Street Gangs Indecency with Child-Contact Murder Sexual Assault of a Child Offenses with Affirmative Finding of Deadly Weapon Intoxicated Manslaughter Drug free zone offenses carry a unique parole eligibility requirement. If convicted of such a crime, an offender must serve five calendar years to become eligible. Consequently, if an offender is sentenced to five-years or less, he/she is not eligible for parole or mandatory supervision. An inmate under sentence of death, serving a sentence of life imprisonment without parole, serving a sentence for and offense of Continuous Sexual Abuse of a Child is not eligible for release on parole. Aggravated Sexual Assault if the victim of the offense is younger than 6-years of age at the time of the offense and if the victim of the offense is younger than 14-years of age at the time of the offense and the actor commits the offense in a manner described. There are certain offenses where a life sentence carries unique initial parole eligible requirements by statute: Capital Murder 40 years actual time served Aggravated Sexual Assault (two prior convictions 1 sex related) 35 years actual time served Aggravated kidnapping with Intent to Abuse Sexually (two prior felony convictions sex related) 35 years actual time served Indecency with Child-Contact (two prior felony convictions 1 sex related) 35 years actual time served Burglary Habitation with intent to sexual assault or indecency with Child (two prior felony convictions 1 sex related) 35 years actual time served HOUSE BILL 1914: In the August 2015 newsletter I notified the prison population of House Bill 1914 changing the minimum set-off from 1-year to 5-years on certain crimes. I received numerous letters explaining the Parole Board could not apply this law retroactively. I am sorry to report the parole board is applying this law retroactively. Where previously a minimum set-off on a aggravated sexual assault or a life sentence would have been one-year with a maximum of 5-years the law is now a mandatory minimum 5-year set-off with a maximum of 10-years. My understanding of ex post facto is there must be a substantive change in the law. A set-off is not considered, under Texas Court of Criminal Appeal decisions, as a substantive change in the law; it is merely procedural. Numerous inmates refused to believe my last newsletter was correct about House Bill 1914. I am now receiving telephone calls from anguished mothers, fathers, girlfriends, and other loved ones who have now discovered their family member, in prison, will not be seen by the parole board for at least 5-years and in some situations I have received telephone calls where an inmate was denied parole and received a 10-year set-off. Once the parole board has made their decision there is no appeal. Steps may have been taken for those individuals before they received the set-offs, but unfortunately, once the set-off is received, no action is available. RUMORS: (1)The Parole Board has a new policy of releasing all inmates convicted of possession of drug charges. This is NOT true. Inmates who have possession of drug convictions still must convince the Parole Board to release the inmate to parole. (2)The legislature is reducing the penalty on possession of 5 grams or less. This is also NOT true. Remember my civic lesson from my last newsletter about the Texas Legislature. It only meets every two-years in odd number years. The next Texas Legislature does not meet until 2017, so any rumor that begins with the Legislature changed some law is false because the Legislature will not meet again until 2017. ***MY ATTORNEY REPRESENTATION & WHY I MUST BE HIRED A LONG TIME BEFORE THE ELIGIBILITY DATE:*** Every inmate is eventually going to be reviewed by the Board. If you want to hire me, I must have time to perform my job. You should hire me before you go into to review. Under Board rules the Parole Board can and often does receive an inmates file 60-days prior to the Parole Eligibility date (Parole Eligibility date is not your hearing date, it is the date you become eligible for parole) and upon receiving the file, the parole panel can vote the inmates case. Any parole package needs to be submitted prior to that date. Since I do not do a three-page form letter (taking the last clients name out and inserting a new clients name in). I need time to investigate, review the evidence gathered, evaluate that evidence, prepare a parole package that can run 30 to 40 pages and then request an Attorney Appearance date and prepare for the presentation of my arguments to the Parole Member; therefore, waiting to hire me up until a few months prior to the eligibility date will not be sufficient time for me to do the job needed to convince the Board to release you to parole. If you believe a 3-page form letter will change the Parole Board’s mind about who you are and what you have become, then you are sadly mistaken. If you are released after such a form letter is filed, you were more than likely going to be released anyway. TIME PAYMENT PLAN: If you decide to hire me and do so well in advance of your eligibility date, I can design a time payment plan for your family or loved ones, but I must be paid in full before I submit the parole package or request an appearance before the Parole Board, which is normally submitted 3-months prior to the parole review date. The time payment plan has been very helpful to many of my clients who have limited financial resources and thereby allowed them to hire me without causing them financial distress because they have hired me many months or even years in advance. If you wait until the last minute, the entire fee is going to be due immediately. February, 2016 HOUSE BILL 1914: In the August 2015 newsletter I notified the prison population of House Bill 1914 changing the minimum set-off from 1-year to 5-years on certain crimes. I received numerous letters explaining the Parole Board could not apply this law retroactively. I am sorry to report the parole board is applying this law retroactively. Where previously a minimum set-off on a aggravated sexual assault or a life sentence would have been one-year with a maximum of 5-years the law is now a mandatory minimum 5-year set-off with a maximum of 10-years. My understanding of ex post facto is there must be a substantive change in the law. A set-off is not considered, under Texas Court of Criminal Appeal decisions, as a substantive change in the law; it is merely procedural. Numerous inmates refused to believe my last newsletter was correct about House Bill 1914. I am now receiving telephone calls from anguished mothers, fathers, girlfriends, and other loved ones who have now discovered their family member, in prison, will not be seen by the parole board for at least 5-years and in some situations I have received telephone calls where an inmate was denied parole and received a 10-year set-off. Once the parole board has made their decision there is no appeal. Steps may have been taken for those individuals before they received the set-offs, but unfortunately, once the set-off is received, no action is available. RUMORS: (1)The Parole Board has a new policy of releasing all inmates convicted of possession of drug charges. Inmates who have possession of drug convictions still must convince the Parole Board to release the inmate to parole. This is NOT ture. (2)The legislature is reducing the penalty on possession of 5 grams or less. This is also NOT true. Remember my civic lesson from my last newsletter about the Texas Legislature. It only meets every two-years in odd number years. The next Texas Legislature does not meet until 2017, so any rumor that begins with the Legislature changed some law is false until the Legislature meets again in 2017. November, 2015 Federal Communication Commission Takes Steps Reducing Inmate Calling Rates: On October 22, 2015 the Federal Communications Commission took steps to rein in the excessive rates and egregious fees on phone calls paid by inmates attempting to stay in touch with loved ones. The Federal Communication Commission cut rates for local and in-state long-distance inmate calling, and cut existing interstate long-distance calls. It also closed loopholes by barring most ad-on fees imposed by inmate calling services (ICS) providers, and set strict limits on the fees that remain. These actions build on reforms begun by the Federal Communication Commission in 2013, when it acted on a petition by grandmother from Washington for relief from the exorbitant rates she was paying to call her grandson in prison. The Order adopted by the Commission lowers the telephone rate to $.11 per minute for all local and long-distance calls from state and federal prisons, while providing tiered rates for jails to account for the higher cost of serving jail and smaller institutions. New caps reduce the average rate for the vast majority of inmate calls substantially from $2.96 to no more than $1.65 for 15 minute intrastate calls for most inmates and from $3.15 to no more than $1.65 for most 15-minute interstate calls. The recaps are as follows: (1) $.11cents/minute for debit and prepaid calls in state or federal prisons (approximately 71% of inmates reside in state or federal prisons). (2) $.14 cents/minute for debit and prepaid calls in jails with 1,000 or more inmates. (3) $.16 cents/minute for debit and prepaid calls in jails with 350-999 inmates. (4) $.22cents/minute for debit and prepaid calls in jails of up to 349 inmates. Rates for collect calls are slightly higher in the first year and will be phased down to these caps over a two-year transition period. Eliminates unnecessary fees by capping or banning burdensome ancillary service charges, which can add nearly 40% to the cost of a single call. The following ancillary service charges have been capped. Automated payment by phone or website is capped at $3.00, payment through a live agent is capped at $5.95, a paper bill fee is capped at $2.00, third-party financial transaction fees may be passed through with no mark-up allowed, prohibits all other ancillary service charges, mandatory taxes and regulatory fees can be passed through with no mark-up. Defines the term site commission and makes a site commission as a profit, not a cost of providing service, and cannot be passed through to the inmate. Thousand of Federal Inmates Being Released Early: About 6000 federal inmates whose drug sentences were reduced will begin the process of being released from custody beginning October 30, 2015. This is the result of a policy change made by the United States Sentencing Commission. The Justice Department has been preparing for the inmate release for the last year and a half, coordinating efforts with immigration, court, prison and probation officials. Approximately a 3rd of the 6000 inmates will be transferred to the United States Immigration and Custom Enforcement and eventually deported to their home countries. Of the remaining, approximately 4000 inmates, about 80% of those will be released from halfway houses or home confinement the other 20% will be returned to their families and loved ones straight from prison under the supervision of probation officers. Texas will receive the largest number of inmates affected by this policy change of approximately 600 and Florida will receive the second-largest with approximately 300. I have received numerous letters and phone calls regarding the release of the federal prisoners. I’ve had to explain to family members and write to inmates and inform them this release only affects federal inmates. The United States Sentencing Commission has no authority over TDCJ are the state of Texas. Only the parole board has the authority to release an inmate from custody after the inmate has served the minimum time in custody. There is no wholesale release of state inmates in Texas. September, 2015 NEW PAROLE BOARD MEMBERS: David Gutierrez Board Member at the Gatesville Parole Board has been appointed to take over Ms. Resse Owens position as Presiding Officer of the Parole Board. Ms. Owens was not reappointed to the Board of Pardons and Paroles. Presently Mr. Gutierrez will remain at the Gatesville Parole Board as a voting member. The Angleton Parole Board has a new Parole Commissioner: Mr. Ira Evans has 18-years experience in Manufacturing and Technical Management in the private sector, joined Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles as an Institutional Parole Officer in 2002, was promoted to Board Analyst in 2010 prior to becoming a Parole Commissioner. The Gatesville Parole Board has two new Parole Commissioners: (1) Ms. Lee Ann Eck-Massingill has a Bachelor of Science in Criminology and Corrections and a Minor in Psychology form Sam Houston State University and has 25-years of Criminal Justice experience. (2) Mr. Roel Tejada has a Bachelor of Arts and a Master’s of Justice Administration from St. Mary’s University, has experience in both Juvenile and Adult systems with emphasis on Substance Abuse, Special Needs and Domestic Violence with over 13-years of Administrative and Supervisory experience. The Huntsville Board has a new Parole Commissioner: Ms. Wanda Saliagas has a Bachelor of Science in Social Rehabilitation and Social Services from Sam Houston State University with 9-years experience in social services and 26-years in criminal justice experience. The San Antonio Board has a new Board Member: Mr. Fred Solis has a Master of Public Administration in Management, University of Texas San Antonio; Bachelor of Science, Wayland Baptist University, U.S. Army Command and General’s Staff College; Texas Master Peace Officer. He is retired U.S. Army Colonel with 40-years of active and reserve duty. He is retired San Antonio Police Officer, Former Police Chief of Olmos Park, Texas, Former Bexar County Criminal District Attorney, White Collar Crimes Investigator, Criminal Justice Adjunct Professor at the University of the Incarnate Word. PAROLE BOARD POLICY CHANGE: The Board of Pardons and Paroles approved the modification of the Approval/Denial reasons provided by the parole panel when rendering a parole decision. The changes are to provide clear and concise reasons for the Approval or Denial of parole and are designed to eliminate any ambiguity that may have previously existed. The implementation will be forthcoming once the computer programming changes are complete. RUMORS: (1) There was no Bill proposed decreasing the mandatory requirement of a person convicted of a 3g offense or any offense in which a weapon was used serving less than 50% of their sentence before they would be eligible for parole. When will people stop believing this rumor? I do not know, but I have been addressing this same rumor for over 10- years, but everyone wants to believe this law has changed. IT HAS NOT. (2) There is another rumor circulating that the Legislature is bringing back mandatory release rule and there will be no longer be discretionary mandatory release review. Inmates must be released when their work time, good time and actual time equals their sentence. This is also NOT true. (3) Again, the inmate rumor mill is still circulating the rumor there is a lawsuit that an inmate has won denying the parole board the ability to use the same reason for denial more than once. This rumor has been going around for some time and I have addressed about two-years ago. This is also NOT true. Remember my civic lesson from my last newsletter about the Texas Legislature. It only meets every two-years in odd number years. The next Texas Legislature does not meet until 2017, so any rumor that begins with the Legislature changed some law is false until the Legislature meets again in 2017. NEW LAWS: There was a fleeting moment of hope that the liberals and conservatives could come together and reform the criminal justice system. Those hopes evaporated like a drop of rain on a hot August day in Texas. This Legislature failed to pass legislation that would lower penalties for nonviolent offenders. Is there any wonder why the Department of Criminal Justice general revenue fund grew by nearly a half billion dollars for the next biennium? This Legislature didn’t pass a law treating 17-year-olds as juveniles rather than adults. It doesn’t seem to bother the conservative legislatures to send teenagers into an adult criminal justice system that has hardened criminals residing in it. This Legislature even passed up an easy one. There was a bill submitted that would stop asking individuals if they have ever been convicted of a felony or had a criminal history on-the-job application. By removing this question on the employment form, an individual would at least get his/her foot in the door for a job interview instead of being summarily denied. This proposed law never made it out of committee. Should any inmate or parolee who is in a sex-offender treatment course be asked to discuss “uncharged but potentially possible criminal events” the person may invoke his Fifth Amendment Right. He cannot be discharged or revoked for asserting his Constitutional Right. However, this right is not applicable to offenses for which there is already a final conviction or and adjudication and he would be expected to discuss these convictions and adjudications during the course of the program or risk being removed. HB-189:This law eliminated the statute of limitation for the offenses of sexual assault and aggravated sexual assault and increases the penalty of other sexual crimes. (See the above explanation on your rights in treatment or interviews). This law takes effect September 2015. HB-333: A defendant who has successfully completed a state jail felony community supervision can, on a written motion, upon completing 2/3 of original supervision request the convicting court to discharge the defendant and amend the record of conviction to reflect a conviction for a Class A misdemeanor. This law goes into effect September 1, 2015. HB-710: Parole Division may issue a summons instead of a warrant on a person charged with violating a condition of parole so long as the individual is not on intensive supervision, an absconder, or deemed a threat to the public safety and is charged an administrative violation, a class B or C misdemeanor. This Bill goes into effect September 1, 2015. HB- 904: This deals with when a convicted individual has been convicted of a felony and is ineligible for release on bail pending appeal, the individual will be transferred to TDCJ. This Act takes effect September 1, 2015. ***HB-1083: requires TDCJ prior to confining an inmate to segregation to have the inmate evaluated by a medical or mental health care professional and a mental health assessment must be performed prior to placing the in administrative segregation. TDCJ may not confine an inmate if the assessment performed indicates that the type of confinement is not appropriate for the inmates medical or mental health. This law goes into effect September 1, 2015. ***HB-1941: Allows the Parole Board the option to give up to a ten-year set- off between parole reviews for those inmates convicted of Capital Murder (life sentence) or aggravated sex cases. These cases will be voted by all 7 Board members and will require 5 favorable votes to receive parole. This law goes into effect September 1, 2015. HB-2189: This requires TDCJ to establish and maintain a program for intellectually disabled or borderline intellectual functioning inmates which provides a safe environment and has specialized programs and treatment for such individuals. This goes into effect September 1, 2015. SB-236: This law increases the punishment range on certain controlled substances offenses committed in a drug-free zone. This goes into effect September 1, 2015. SB-487: Allows a convicted person to submit to the convicting court a motion for forensic DNA testing of evidence where there is a reasonable likelihood of biological material existing. This law goes into effect September 1, 2015. ***SB-578: TDCJ shall identify organizations that provide reentry and reintegration resources and shall collaborate with those organizations to make these resources available to all inmates. This takes effect September 1, 2015. SB-589: Allows inmates serving a state jail conviction to receive credit against the defendants sentence up to 1/5th of the sentence if the defendant participated in educational, vocational, treatment, or work programs while confined. This law goes into effect September 1, 2015. SB -662: The convicting court shall appoint an attorney to an indigent applicant for writ of habeas corpus whose sentence has been suspended, reduced to a lesser offense, or the courts have found a law to be unconstitutional. This takes effect September 1, 2015. SB-746: This very extensive law sets up the procedure for the civil commitment of those person who have been found guilty of a sexually predatory act, sexually violent offense and set forth the definitions of such acts. This law takes effect September 1, 2015. ***SB-790: A parolee charged with committing an administrative violation of release, a new misdemeanor offense and not a violation of family violence or DWI shall receive a bond from a magistrate of the county in which the individual is confined if there is a showing the parolee is not an absconder or a threat to public safety. This law goes into effect September 1, 2015. SB-1326: This law sets forth the maximum cumulative period a defendant can be kept in custody to determine his competency to stand trial. This law goes into effect September 1, 2015. February, 2015 Rumors: (1) It has come to my attention there is a vicious rumor circulating throughout the prison system that I have been blackballed by the parole boards in every region and that anyone who hires me will automatically be denied parole. FALSE: I am in good standing with all the parole boards and their members and continue to be heard by them arguing in my clients’ behalf, as I have for over 20-years successfully. Last week alone, every client I argued for was granted parole. So, I reiterate, there is no truth to this rumor. (2) President Barack Obama and Congress will be working to reduce the prison population. FALSE: While there is ongoing discussions in Washington regarding criminal justice reform, there have been no bills proposed as of the date of this letter. Also, any reform on the federal level will only affect federal prisons. (3) Should a close relative die you can petition the Parole Board for a special review of your previous denial. FALSE: Should a death occur, an inmate can petition the Warden for a furlough to attend the funeral. (4) Any rumor starting with the Texas Legislature has changed the law… FALSE: No laws have been passed by the Legislature in the two weeks the Legislature has been in session beginning January 2015. New Laws: A very scarey decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in United States of America v. Marvin Reese came out January 5, 2015. During a hearing to revoke Mr. Reese’s supervised release (federal probation), the question of whether the drugs found on him were illegal drugs was elicited by the United States Attorney through the testimony of a police officer instead of the lab technician who performed the test. The Court states: We begin with the proposition that the revocation of parole is not part of a criminal prosecution and thus the full panoply of rights due a defendant in a criminal proceeding does not apply to parole revocations. Should this decision remain, a police officer could testify in a state parole revocation hearing that the substance found on a parolee was an illegal substance or the officer could testify the girlfriend told the officer the parolee hit or threatened to harm her and the Parole Board could accept this as evidence of a parole violation. The only saving fact is an implied understanding that if Mr. Reese had issued a subpoena and objected to the testimony at the hearing, then there may have been a different outcome. That is why I always issue subpoenas and object at parole revocation hearings to protect my client. I have been fortunate to have not lost a parole revocation at a revocation hearing in 7-8 years. PAROLE DECISIONS BY BOARD MEMBERS AND COMMISSIONERS FOR THE YEAR 2014 PAROLE BOARD BOARD MEMBER APPROVAL RATE DENIAL RATE Amarillo James LaFavers 36.1% 63.9% Amarillo Marsha Moberley 35.0% 65.0% Amarillo Charles A. Shipman 29.4% 70.6% Angleton Cynthia Tauss 39.7% 60.3% Angleton Lynn Ruzicka 40.7% 59.3% Austin Troy Fox 44.6% 55.4% Austin Elvis Hightower 44.3% 55.7% Gatesville David Gutierrez 38.5% 61.5% Gatesville Lee Ann Eck-Massingill 30.7% 69.3% Gatesville Roel Tejada 31.0% 69.0% Huntsville Rissie Owens 88.7% 11.3% Huntsville Fred Rangel 42.8% 57.2% Huntsville Roy A. (Tony) Garcia 36.7% 63.3% Palestine Michelle Skyrme 32.8% 67.2% Palestine James Paul Kiel, Jr. 30.0% 70.0% Palestine James A. Hensarling 33.4% 66.6% San Antonio Juanita Gonzalez 37.8% 62.2% San Antonio Charles C. Speier 34.3% 65.7% San Antonio Anthony Ramirez 28.8% 71.2% AVERAGE TOTAL 33.9% 66.1% The methodology I used in calculating the total average was to take out the percentage for Rissie Owens because as head of the Parole Board she only voted on approximately 450 cases in the year to date versus most Parole Board Members who voted in excess of 3500 cases year to date. I believe the probability of any inmate of being voted on by Ms. Owens would be a statistical anomaly and the greater probability of a vote by the other members would be more probable. Of Interest : I received a phone call from Juanita Gonzalez last week informing me she will be retiring from the San Antonio Parole Board as soon as the Governor appoints an individual to take her place. I will miss arguing cases to her. While she may not have always agreed with my assessment of why my client deserved parole, she always listened and asked very informed questions about my client. That type of individual is always needed on the parole board. This will now make three appointments the new Governor will have to make to fill the existing vacancies at the Angleton Board, Huntsville Board and now Juanita Gonzalez’s position at San Antonio Board. (1) Mr. Rangel who was a Parole Board Commissioner at the Angleton Board has been moved to the Huntsville Board to assist Mr. Garcia in voting parole cases. (2) For those inmates with Hepatitis C, there has been a major breakthrough in medicine with the release of Sovaldi from Gilead Sciences Company. This drug can cure Hepatitis C within weeks or months of taking the pill once a day for up to 12-weeks. The bad news is it costs $1,000.00 per pill for a total cost of curing the disease of approximately $84,000.00 for the treatment. Prisons across the country will be facing a dilemma. Treating these inmates could make a big dent in the Hepatitis C epidemic, but finding the money to do it will be another story. (3) The sole Judge Michael Seiler who hears civil commitment of sex-offenders has come under fire for remarks he made about the offenders who face him in court as psychopaths or once suggesting treating the sex-offender with castration from the neck up. To date there have been 16 Motion to Recuse Judge Seiler from hearing these types of cases and 8 have been granted by three different judges. In at least seven cases, appellate courts have sided with the defense attorney and reversed Judge Seiler’s decision to civilly commit defendants. (4) For the first time, Texas Appellate courts have overturned the convictions of two teenagers who were certified by the juvenile courts to be an adult. They were subsequently tried as adults and sent to TDCJ. For over a quarter century, not a single juvenile certification had been successfully challenged until January of this year. Based on the opinions in the two cases, the Appellate courts will now require sufficient evidence as to why the youth in question should stand trial as an adult. Attorneys in Office: Greg Tsioros is a criminal defense attorney who handles all forms of criminal defense cases and Johnny P. Papantonakis is a criminal defense attorney who handles cases in both federal and state courts and is fluent in Spanish. They are both now accepting parole cases after having worked with me to understand the complexity of parole in Texas. Johnny will be assisting me in representing inmates as well as family members who speak Spanish and need help convincing the Board to release there loved one to parole. Parole Representation: I continue to be contacted by family members requesting my help after having spent their hard earned money on parole representation by other attorneys and receiving a meager 3-page letter begging the Board to release the inmate with a few support letters attached and told that is a parole package. Unfortunately, if that is what people have fallen prey to for around $2,000.00, then money has been wasted as it will have very little if any impact on the Board’s decision. If an inmate receives parole after such a package has been filed, it is most likely the inmate would have been released without the loss of $2,000.00 or the waste of paper the so-called Parole Package was written on. The simple fact is, the Parole Board is looking for evidence an inmate deserves to be released. The only way I know how to get this type of evidence is to gather information and documentation from the various agencies, the inmate, the inmate’s family and friends, and others, review and evaluate that information, and attempt to find mitigating proof the crime my client was charged with was not as bad as the Parole Members may have perceived when they read the IPO summary, or that my client is no longer the same person who committed the act and was sent to prison. To prepare an informative Parole Package (usually some 30 or 40 pages long) and then prepare a persuasive argument to the Parole Board, I have to clearly reflect that my client has gotten his/her life together so the Parole Board feels sure he/she will not receive a telephone call from some reporter demanding to know why that inmate was released instead of made to serve out the entire sentence because now the released inmate has committed a horrible new crime. Remember, the easy answer for the Board is to say NO to a request for parole, instead of granting it. If you really believe a 3-page parole package will convince the Board to grant you parole, simply prepare it yourself instead of wasting money on nonproductive representation. May, 2014 Parole system and TDCJ update: For decades, there have been 18 Parole Board Members in the state of Texas. In my last letter I notified my clients that the Legislature had appropriated funds for a new Parole Board Office in Austin, Texas. I verified this during a discussion with Ms. Rissie Owens who is the Presiding Officer of the Parole Board. It took some time for the Governor to appoint the two new commissioners, but as of the date of this letter there is a new Parole Board office in Austin consisting of Rissie Owens, Troy G. Fox and Elvis Hightower. Troy G. Fox was previously a commissioner at the Gatesville Board. His education consists of a Bachelor of Science in Criminology and Corrections from Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, Texas. His background consists of over 35-years experience in corrections and criminal justice field in positions ranging from probation officer to various management positions with TDCJ-Parole Division and the Board of Pardons and Paroles. Mr. Elvis Hightower was also relocated from the Gatesville Board to the new Austin Board Office. His education consists of a Bachelors Degree from Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, Texas. His background consists of 11-years experience as a prison warden. The Governor then appointed two new Parole Board Commissioners to the Gatesville Board: Ms. Lee Ann Eck-Massingill, who has a Bachelor of Science in Criminology and Corrections and a Minor in Psychology from Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, Texas. Her background consists of 25-years in the criminal justice arena. Also appointed to the Gatesville Board is Mr. Roel Tejada who has a Bachelor of Arts and a Master of Justice Administration from St. Mary’s University, San Antonio, Texas. His background consists of criminal justice experience in both juvenile and adult systems with an emphasis on Substance Abuse, Special Needs and Domestic Violence. Due to the creation of the new Austin Parole Board Office, there will probably be a realignment of the various regions and units with some being placed under the new board and other units reassigned to other board offices. As of the date of this letter, there is no official designation as to what units will be placed under the Austin Parole Board. I anticipate the realignment will occur mainly from those units under the San Antonio Parole Board, Gatesville Parole Board, possibly the Huntsville Parole Board and maybe a few units from the Angleton Parole Board; however, there could be a complete realignment throughout the entire system. Once I have received an official chart indicating what units will be placed under what parole boards I will post it on my website and it will probably be in my next letter that will go out sometime this summer. If you are interested in knowing what units will be voted by what parole board, I suggest you periodically check my web page. Once I have placed this information on my web page it can printed out and sent to any inmate so he/she can be updated as to what parole board will be assigned to what units. The overall release rate has not changed drastically since my last letter. As of March 2014 the overall release rate is 35.67% which means that approximately 65% of inmates are being denied parole at present. The new Parole Board Members’ voting records have not been calculated as of the posted March 2014 statistics I recently received. I anticipate it will be approximately 3 or 4 months before there is any new statistical information regarding how the new Parole Board Members are voting. Upon receiving this information it will also be placed on my web page and be in my next letter. Generally, when a new Parole Board Member begins voting, they have a tendency to vote very conservatively. Should that occur, it will probably affect the Gatesville Board’s statistics since Mr. Fox and Mr. Hightower were there for a number of years. Posted in Slider Post navigation ← Houston Top Lawyer AwardParole Wins →