Document: 482 U.S. 369 107 S.Ct. 2415 96 L.Ed.2d 303 BOARD OF PARDONS and Henry Burgess, Petitionersv.George ALLEN Dale Jacobsen etc. No. 86-461. Argued April 1, 1987. Decided June 9, Syllabus In Greenholtz v. Nebraska Penal Inmates, 442 99 2100, 60 668, the Court held that mandatory language structure of a parole-release statute created an "expectancy release," liberty interest entitled to protection under Due Process Clause. The Montana at issue in this case provides prisoner eligible for parole "shall" be released when there is reasonable probability no detriment will result him or community, specifies shall ordered best interests society, State Board Pardons (Board) believes able willing assume obligations law-abiding citizen. After being denied parole, respondent prisoners filed civil rights action against petitioners, its Chair, alleging them due process by failing apply statutorily mandated criteria determining eligibility, adequately explain reasons denials. Although acknowledging was controlled principles established Greenholtz, District ruled respondents were not protections connection with their denials, concluding that, because required make determinations respect community prisoner, discretion too broad provide release. Appeals reversed remanded, finding virtually indistinguishable from considered Greenholtz. Held: When scrutinized standards, clearly creates release protected Clause Fourteenth Amendment. Although, as decision here "necessarily . subjective predictive" Board's "very broad," nevertheless, statute, like uses ("shall") create presumption granted designated findings are made. This exists whether, mandates "unless" made, here, necessary "when" "if" made "subject to" them. Moreover, "substantive predicates" similar those Nebraska, since each requires consideration impact on both prisoner's ability lead life, whether cause "detriment community," vests State's board equivalent discretion. That places significant limits further demonstrated replacement earlier which allowed absolute discretion, specifying purpose creation restrictions addition provision authorizing judicial review decisions. Pp. 373-381. 792 F.2d 1404 (CA9 1986), affirmed. BRENNAN, J., delivered opinion Court, WHITE, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, POWELL, STEVENS, JJ., joined. O'CONNOR, dissenting opinion, REHNQUIST, C.J., SCALIA, joined, post, p. 381. Clay R. Smith, Helena, Mont., petitioners. Stephen L. Pevar, Denver, Colo., respondents. Justice BRENNAN Court. 1 question presented have 2 * Respondents George Allen Jacobsen, inmates Prison.1 1984, after applications denied, they pursuant 42 U.S.C. § 1983 behalf class all present future Prison who might become parole. Seeking declaratory injunctive relief, well compensatory damages, complaint charged Chair violations inmates' rights. Specifically, alleged does eligibility Complaint &Par; 6-9, App. 5a-6a, denial id., 10, 6a.2 3 first acknowledged Court's 668 (1979). despite necessarily predictive nature decision, see 12, S.Ct., 2106, state statutes may concluded such protection. Ibid. recognized contained mandating certain circumstances, it decided "were board's parole." 17a. court 4 reversed. It compared provisions found indistinguishable: 5 "The language. states 'shall' determines would harmful, unless specified conditions exist preclude There doubt it, great Board. Under must difficult highly decisions about risks releasing inmates. However, deny either once harm probable." 1404, 1406 1986). 6 thus had stated claim upon relief could granted, remanded "the [respondents]" "whether Montana's procedures accord process." Id., 1408. 7 We certiorari, 479 947, 431, 93 381 (1986), now affirm. II 8 set forth two major holdings. presence system itself give rise constitutionally release.3 also held, however, did "expectation parole" U.S., 11, 2106. To decide gives interest, we scrutinize standards 9 involved follows: "Whenever Parole considers committed offender order his should deferred because: 10 "(a) substantial risk he conform parole; 11 "(b) His depreciate seriousness crime promote disrespect law; 12 "(c) substantially adverse effect institutional discipline; 13 "(d) continued correctional treatment, medical care, vocational other training facility enhance capacity life later date." Neb.Rev.Stat. 83-1,114(1) (1981) (emphasis added). 14 sets list factors (including one catchall factor permitting consider information deems relevant) reaching decision. §§ 83-1,114(2)(a)-(n). 15 deciding language—the use word "shall"—and created—that four justifications deferral found. See 11-12, 2106.4 16 recognized—indeed highlighted—that inherently predictive, but nonetheless possessed observed equity-type judgment involving "a synthesis record facts personal observation filtered through experience decisionmaker leading what individual inmate 8, 2104,5 most statutes, "vest[ed] very Board," 13, 2107. Nevertheless, rejected argument "that [of release] only if statutory essentially factual, rather than predictive." 17 general criteria—delegating decisionmaker—did deprive statute. essence, distinction between entirely distinct term sense word, official has she "is simply bound authority question." Dworkin, Taking Rights Seriously 32 (1977). sense, officials been told whomever wish determined scheme awarding type But instead signify "an applying [or her] authority"; words, regulatory "cannot applied mechanically." supra, 31, 32; 69 ("[W]e say man duty defined [people] can interpret different ways"). incompatible existence (in discretion) prerequisites exist. 18 Throughout litigation, arguments single theme: holding inconsistent our Greenholtz.6 mistaken. pertinent part: 19 "Prisoners (1) Subject following restrictions, any person confined prison women's correction center without community[.] 20 21 "(2) A society award clemency reduction sentence pardon. placed fulfill citizen." Mont.Code Ann. 46-23-201 (1985) added).7 22 Significantly, ("shall")8 "creat[e] granted" 2106.9 Statement Assistant Attorney General Montana, Tr. Oral Arg. ("under underlying particular application occur consistently three specifies, then law release"). reject "if," "when," Any "creates granted." 2106.10 23 predicates," Hewitt Helms, 459 460, 472, 103 864, 871, 74 675 (1983), Nebraska. States, assess community. central concern "to life." 83-1,114(1)(d) (1981); 83-1,114(1)(a) (prisoner parole"); 46-23-201(2) when, inter alia, her "able citizen"). An interrelated achieved community." 46-23-201(1) (1985); "for society"); 83-1,114(1)(b) "would law"). left boards 24 legislative history supports conclusion enacted 1955, replacing 1907 Board: 25 "Parole Prison.—The Governor recommend Commissioners Prison, regulations deemed expedient, adopted board." Mont.Rev.Code 9573 (1907). 26 new title: "An Act Creating Prescribing Appointment Composition Thereof, With Power Duty Grant Paroles, Within Restrictions. ." Mar. 3, 1955 Mont. Laws, ch. 153 added decisions, 46-23-107 (1985), providing indication intent cabin 27 Here, predictive," 2107; ibid.; prerequisite ---- ----. Thus, find 28 Affirmed. 29 whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE SCALIA join, dissenting. 30 Relying semantics ignoring altogether sweeping law, today concludes legitimate expectation sufficient procedural process. Because I conclude accorded belies entitlement respectfully dissent. 31 Regents Roth, 408 564, 92 2701, 33 548 (1972), "clearly more abstract need desire it. He unilateral must, instead, it." 577, 2709. Applying these principles, Roth teacher property renewal 1-year contract fact teachers hired year-to-year basis university rehired. 578, n. 16, 2710. employment renew subject "cause" limitations. teaches mere benefit—even supported consistent government practice—is Instead, benefit before triggered. my view, "entitlement" "expectancy" depend degree decisionmakers' constrained law. nothing hope receiving confer real channeled crucial inquiry created, cannot merely point some "standard." act limit meaningfully decisionmakers. administrative context long purported " 'are drawn terms given apply.' Citizens Preserve Overton Park Volpe, 401 402, 410, 91 814, 821, 136 (1971) (quoting S.Rep. 752, 79th Cong., 1st Sess., (1945)). Accordingly, agency within meaning Administrative Procedure Act; result, "no judicially manageable available judging how exercise discretion." Heckler Chaney, 470 830, 105 1649, 1655, 84 714 (1985). less critical includes place precedents, "particularized criteria" constrain relevant Connecticut Dumschat, 452 458, 467, 101 2460, 2465-2466, 158 (BRENNAN, concurring). Meachum Fano, 427 215, 2532, 49 451 (1976), example, remaining penal "conferred right remain initially assigned, defeasible proof specific acts misconduct." 226, 2539 transfer negated interest: 34 "A behavior precipitate transfer; absent behavior, perhaps take all. But, said, Massachusetts number reasons. Their limited instances serious misconduct. As understand legal violated misconduct proved accordance circumstances. Whatever so behaves himself, ephemeral insubstantial trigger whatever reason all." 228, 2540. 35 Olim Wakinekona, 461 238, 249, 1741, 1747, 75 813 (1983) ("[A] placing substantive limitations discretion"); (observing provided "explicitly requiring predicates") added); Montanye Haymes, 236, 243, 2543, 2547, 466 (1976) (no occurrence misconduct); Wolff McDonnell, 418 539, 557, 94 2963, 2975, 41 935 (1974) ("[T]he good time forfeited misbehavior"). 36 paying lipservice principle utterly fails "standards" officials. Even cursory examination reveals restraint, anything "particularized." sharp contrast require determines: "reasonable society," 46-23-201(2); appellate reviewing "in society" "detriment[al] community" little taking These broadly framed leave grant Board, therefore Herman, New Liberty: Procedural Prisoners Others Burger 59 N.Y.U. L.Rev. 482, 550 (1984) ("A prospective parolee 'poses danger society' significantly nonreviewable, unlikely reverse discretionary standard"). 37 Admittedly, (1979), offer "particularized" restrain aberration reexamined strictly facts. Nonetheless, marked least scope dispositive granting denying While permits focused factors: "there [the prisoner] parole," (2) "release [the] law," (3) discipline," (4) "continued prisoner's] (1981). Therefore, compelled even assuming correctly decided. 38 sum, abandoned essential interest. Instead particularized actually decisionmakers, satisfied approach odds jurisprudence, Both suit filed. 1408, moot, however. requesting sought damages Pardons, capacities. "this enjoy immunity matter federal Cleavinger Saxner, 474 193, 200, 106 496, 500, 88 507 validity respondents' foreclosed prior proceed." Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division Craft, 436 8-9, 98 1554, 1560, 56 (1978). Of 350 individuals 1985, 276 conditionally released, vast majority persons served full sentences. Dept. Justice, Bureau Statistics, Federal Institutions December Table 43 Only 363 1984 discharged Standards, (1984). far conferred statutes. 466, 868-869, (1983); 468, 2466, (WHITE, Four Members view solely function wording governing 18, 2109 (POWELL, concurring part part) ("I do believe, depends deliberations board"); 22, 2111 (MARSHALL, ("[A]ll potentially deprived process, regardless implements system"). At stake return freedom, albeit conditional freedom; bodily restraint heart "derived permit[s] criminal offenders serve sentences probation 24-25, 2113 part); 19, 2110 ("[W]hen adopts applies justifiably expect fairly according whenever met"). proceed, analysis necessitates Cf. 471-472, 871. Pennsylvania's segregation population. relied "language unmistakably character" specification confinement—"the control," threat disturbance." 2105 Kadish, Advocate Expert—Counsel Peno-Correctional Process, 45 Minn.L.Rev. 803, (1961)) ("The turns 'discretionary assessment multiplicity imponderables, entailing primarily done' "). Pet. Cert. ("Reasons Granting Writ[:] Appeals' Opinion Clearly Misconstrues "); Brief Petitioners (The with, by, deviates related reversed"); Reply parties urged abandonment contended consonant respective positions"). section No convict paroled until one-half term, except nondangerous one-quarter term. serving 171/2 years. Grifaldo State, 182 287, 596 P.2d 847 (1979) (Section 46-18-404(1) sentencing designate defendant met; defendants designation parole-eligibility status accompanies it). argues statements Supreme privilege, grace, right. true establish categories convicted persons, 7, 2103-2104, release; None cases cited met. Cavanaugh Crist, 189 274, 615 890 (1980) (upholding constitutionality judge forbid offenders); Lopez 176 352, 578 312 (1978) (allowing keep whose wrongfully revoked custody up days devise acceptable plan, impose supervise parole); re Frost, 146 403 612 (1965) (finding blanket minimum period); Hart, 145 203, 399 984 (permitting reincarceration ignored ex rel. Herman Powell, 139 583, 367 553 (1961) extinguish paroling subsequent sentence); Goff 641, 557 equal codefendant was). while lists obligated making findings, "lists same factors, regulations. Rules 20.25.505 (1980). Courts Appeals, infra, relevance determination 470-471, 870-871; 2465-2466 judgment). addition, obligate 46-23-202(1) circumstances offense, previous social record, conduct, employment, attitude prison, reports physical mental examinations made"). WHITE pointed out, Circuits split absence creating precludes regulation Anderson Winsett, 449 1093, 891, 66 822 certiorari). demonstrates, "restrictive interpretation Greenholtz," Baumann Arizona Department Corrections, 754 841, 844 1985), courts phrase "[s]ubject restrictions," restrictive interpretation. fall into categories. phrased explicitly release, Parker Corrothers, 750 653, 661 (CA8 1984) (Arkansas regulation); Mayes Trammell, 751 175, 178 (CA6 (Tennessee Rule); Williams Missouri Probation Parole, 697, 698 1981) (Missouri statute), cert. 455 993, 102 1621, 71 855 (1982). Conversely, "may" Dace Mickelson, 797 574, 576 1986) (South Dakota statute); 657 Gale Moore, 763 341, 343 1985) (amended Dock Latimer, 729 1287, 1288 (CA10 (Utah Irving Thigpen, 732 1215, 1216 (CA5 (Mississippi Candelaria Griffin, 641 868, 869 (New Mexico Briscoe, (CA5) (Texas 454 854, 299, 70 147 Schuemann Colorado Adult 624 172, 174 1980) (Colorado Shirley Chestnut, 603 805, 806-807 1979) (Oklahoma Wagner Gilligan, 609 866, 867 (Ohio statute). third divided Most met Patten North 783 140, 142 (North Huggins Isenbarger, 798 204-205 (CA7 (Indiana Berard Vermont 730 71, (CA2 (Vermont Thomas Sellers, 691 487, 488 (CA11 1982) (Alabama Staton Wainwright, 665 686, 688 (Florida Jackson Reese, 608 159, 160 (Georgia Boothe Hammock, 605 661, 664 York United States Scott Illinois Pardon 669 1185, 1188 (Illinois Yet fourth finds elaborate explicit guidelines 577-578 regulations); Green Black, 755 687, policy statement); Winsett McGinnes, 617 996, 1007 (CA3 (Delaware regulations),

Category: 3