Opinion ID: 2600491
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Clemency Issue Is Ripe for Decision.

Text: The superior court concluded that Lewis's claim is ripe because there is an actual controversy about whether Lewis has an exceptional health condition that might warrant executive clemency prior to parole eligibility. The state argues that Lewis's clemency application will not be ripe until Lewis's 2011 applications for discretionary parole and executive clemency are denied. But this argument conflicts with the parole board's own eligibility criteria. The board's informational booklet for prospective clemency applicants, Executive Clemency in Alaska, states: Generally, applications for executive clemency will not be considered until after the person has served some portion of the sentence. Applications will not be considered until the person has reached his or her parole period (where applicable) or has been denied parole. Applications may be considered earlier only upon a substantial showing of innocence or some other exceptional circumstance arising since trial, which clearly justifies a possible extension of executive clemency. (Emphasis added.) Therefore an application presenting an exceptional circumstance may be considered before the applicant has reached her parole period. Lewis argued in the superior court and argues here on appeal that she hopes to prove an exceptional circumstance making clemency appropriate before she becomes eligible for parole. Because it is at least theoretically possible that a prisoner could suffer from an exceptional health condition warranting executive clemency before she reaches parole eligibility, the superior court did not err in concluding that Lewis's constitutional claim is ripe. [5]