Document: 529 U.S. 244120 S.Ct. 1362146 L.Ed.2d 236 J. WAYNE GARNER, FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE STATE BOARD PARDONS AND PAROLES GEORGIA, et al. , PETITIONERSv.ROBERT L. JONES No. 99-137. Supreme Court of the United States Argued January 11, 2000 Decided March 28, Syllabus Respondent escaped while serving a life sentence for murder, committed another and was sentenced to second term. Georgia law requires State's Board Pardons Paroles (Board) consider inmates sentences parole after seven years. At time respondent his offense, Board's Rule 475-3-.05(2) required that reconsiderations take place every three Acting pursuant statutory authority, subsequently extended reconsideration period at least eight The has discretion shorten interval, but declined do so when it applied amended in respondent's case, citing multiple offenses circumstances nature offense. sued petitioner members, claiming retroactive application violated Ex Post Facto Clause. District denied motion discovery awarded petitioners summary judgment. Eleventh Circuit reversed. It found Rule's necessarily an ex post facto violation differed material respects from change California sustained Dept. Corrections v. Morales, 514 U. S. 499 . did not internal policies regarding its implementation Rule, finding, among other things, such were unenforceable easily changed. Held: 1. Appeals' analysis failed reveal whether amendment controlling inquiry is creates sufficient risk increasing measure punishment attached covered crimes. supra, 509. Here, question significant prolonging incarceration. That inherent framework, otherwise been demonstrated on record. While Morales identified several factors convincing this California's created insignificant increased inmates, careful adopt single formula identifying which adjustments would survive challenge. must have due flexibility formulating procedure addressing problems associated with confinement release. This case turns operation within whole context Georgia's system. gives broad determining inmate should receive early Such does displace Clause's protections, idea capacity, obligation, adapt based experience. structure, implementing regulations, unrefuted representations operations support conclusion will exercise between reviews. qualified two important respects. First, vests as how often set inmate's date reconsideration, 8-year maximum. Second, permit expedited reviews event circumstance or new information. These qualifications dates according likelihood review result meaningful considerations suitable policy providing years expect be granted during intervening enables ensure those prisoners who come attention. Given criminal history, difficult see longer 8-year, 3-year, interval. Yet, even he may seek earlier upon showing changed Circuit's supposition seems certain incarceration falls short rigorous by standard. When rule own terms show risk, demonstrate, evidence drawn rule's practical agency charged exercising discretion, than under rule. On record cannot concluded lengthened actual imprisonment time. Pp. 5-11. 2. erred considering statement intends enforce minimum, statements, along practices, provide instruction interprets enabling statute therefore punishment. Absent demonstration contrary, presumed follows commands policies. 11-12. 3. operation, respondent. He claims permitted make showing. matter adequate one Appeals or, need be, first instance. P. 12. 164 F. 3d 589, reversed remanded. writ certiorari united states court appeals eleventh circuit Kennedy, J., delivered opinion Court, Rehnquist, C. O'Connor, Thomas, Breyer, JJ., joined. Scalia, filed concurring part Souter, dissenting opinion, Stevens Ginsburg, Justice Kennedy Court. 1 We decide permitting extension intervals violates violation. In disagreement determination, we reverse judgment remand further proceedings. 2 * 1974 Robert Jones began conviction murder State Georgia. prison some five later and, being fugitive over years, murder. apprehended, convicted, 1982 3 Under law, all times relevant here, (Board Parole Board) Ga. Code Ann. 42-9-45(b) (1982). issue concerns interval proceedings reconsider initial denial. Rules & Regs., (1979). 1985, had begun sentence, Board, acting authority "set forth ... periodic [for parole] shall place," 42-9-45(a) (1982), "[r]econsideration years," (1985). 4 considered 1989, conviction. release consistent 1985 475-3-.05(2), 1997, later. 1991, however, held Akins Snow 922 2d 1558, cert. denied, 501 1260 (1991). compliance decision, effect reinstating 3-year reconsidered 1992 1995. Both action "multiple offenses" "circumstances of" App. 53-54. 5 1995 determined our decision (1995), rejected rationale underlying resumed scheduling next consideration 2003. Had wished so, could shortened selected 54. Respondent, pro se brought 42 1983, Rev. Stat. 1979, claiming, inter alia suit against individual members requested leave conduct claim, entered petitioners. "change[d] only timing hearings" prison, thereby "relieving necessity holding hearings no reasonable chance released." Pet. Cert. 27a Because "a their where receives information," 56, parole, " `only most speculative attenuated possibility' prisoner's punishment, (quoting supra 509). 6 reversed, finding distinguishable 589 (CA11 1999). violative Clause, posited affected change--all sentences--is "bound far more sizeable "--inmates convicted homicide. Id., 594. sweeps coverage, continued, "many can point paroled," ibid. thus "seems number find length Clause Constitution," id. 595. "Eight long time," emphasized, "[m]uch happen course affect determination parole." Ibid. recognized into future (up years) concludes `it granted' sooner. Board). thought insufficient, because, unlike require "to any particularized findings" "carefully tailored." 3d, 594-595. also denials "change circumstance[s]" receipt "new information." deemed stating "[p]olicy regulations are changed, adherence them discretion." Id. 7 certiorari, 527 ___ (1999), now reverse. II 8 prohibited enacting law. Const., Art. I, 10, cl. One function bar enactments which, increase crime commission. Collins Youngblood, 497 37, (1990) (citing Beazell Ohio, 269 167, 169-170 (1925)). Retroactive changes laws governing prisoners, instances, precept. See Lynce Mathis, 519 433, 445-446 (1997) Weaver Graham, 450 24, 32 (1981)); S., 508 -509. Whether particular prohibition legislation difficulty vested board taken account. 9 Our recent appropriate beginning point. There frequency year up 503 violation, emphasizing procedural creating affecting conditions prohibited. 508-509. `degree.' 509 171). inquiry, determined, crimes." 10 violate modify imposed offenses. Nor alter standards either eligibility suitability parole. 507. basic structure decrease limited class, consisting 507, 510. If low existed member hence. not, prohibit requests circumstances. 512-513. Historical practices penal system indicated "about 90% unsuitable hearing, 85% subsequent hearings." 510-511 re Jackson 39 Cal. 464, 473, 703 100, 105 (1985)). these facts conserving reallocating resources expended annual little 511 -512. sum illustrated "create[d] possibility producing 11 Consistent analysis, stresses differences reviewed 475-.3-05(2), urges, permits (not just years); covers murderers); affords fewer safeguards (in particular, formal counsel present). dispositive. id., requisite framework 12 suggest model procedures avoid offending undertaken identify convinced us inmates. careful, legislative adjustments, matters bearing observed employed "the micromanagement endless array sentencing procedures." 508. remain concerns. 13 charges "may released pardon [with] fixing thereof." 42-9-20 (1997). making decisions, same part, provides: 14 "Good conduct, achievement fifth-grade level higher standardized reading tests, efficient performance duties favor merit No placed until unless there probability that, if released, live himself respectable law-abiding person compatible welfare society. Furthermore, satisfied suitably self-sustaining employment become public charge." 42-9-42(c). 15 42-9-43 (listing information consider, including wardens' reports, results physical mental examinations, reports prisoners' educational programs). provisions illustrate possesses Accord, Sultenfuss 35 1494, 1501-1502 1994) (en banc) (describing Only engaged "gross abuse discretion" prisoner challenge denial courts. Lewis Griffin 258 887, 888, n. 3, 376 E. 364, 366, (1989). 16 presence protections however. Cf. 30 -31. danger legislatures might disfavor persons fact present context, stated guards abuse. Miller Florida, 482 423, 429 (1987) Calder Bull, Dall. 386, 389 (1798) (Chase, J.)). hand, extent inheres doctrine constructive notice before commission offense penalty transgression, 28-29, say assurance concerned very definition, subject manner informed then exercised. New insights accuracy predictions about recidivism consequent offender's release, complex factors, inform decisions. See, e. g. 234 749, 751-752, 218 45, 46-47 (1975) (explaining, illustration circumstances, decisions rest numerous specific rehabilitative efforts, ability responsible, productive life). essence it, reviews, exercised all. lead conclusion. 17 changing (1985) ("Reconsideration years"). "expedited warrant sooner review." 56. accurate outset. Rather cases forma "when, years." put better use, By concentrating efforts having good otherwise. 18 well illustrates designed escape decided Yet develops, may, [his] runs course. 19 accept certain" periods standard announced 506 -507, ("After focus produces ambiguous sort `disadvantage' increases punishable"). litigation covering homicide proceeded assumption purposes discerning us, remains though general produce 20 contained Without knowledge increases, degree, incarceration, claim rests speculation. 21 conclude imprisonment. premise exercises accordance assessment each dates. out hold true they invoke adopted 22 statement. whether, fact, agency's indicate discretion. INS Yueh-Shaio Yang, 26, (1996) (observing reasonableness discretionary gauged reference practices). incorrect relevance case. presume fulfilling obligations. rel. Accardi Shaugnessy, 347 260, 266-268 (1954). relied representation practice granting inmates' review. 512 -513 Reply Brief Petitioner, O. T. 1994, 93-1462, p. 1.). contrast, formal, published Rule. fortiori disregarded policy. contrary respondent, respect request consideration. 23 remanded opinion. 24 ordered. 25 Scalia 26 I agree Court's faced parole-eligibility determinations prescribed legislature. Since believe, pose "risk" decreasing without remand. 27 treats mere variation theme, whereas reality contains critical difference: fixed given Prison Terms frequency. ; ante 5. change. Today, automatic "periodic reconsideration," 42-9-45. period, like ultimate entrusted 28 Any sensible faithful historical meaning, draw distinction anticipate crime, opportunities mercy clemency go reduction penalty. know precedent proposition defendant entitled degree expected traditional minimum-maximum (twenty life, example), absurd argue e x compassionate judge presided district replaced, prior defendant's trial, so-called "hanging judge." Discretion harsh scheme, compassion risks offender knowingly assumes. 29 margins, sure, distinguish justice mercy. A reduces amounts behavior realistically viewed entitlement--a penalty--rather grant leniency. But immeasurably removed (which Board), is--and offense--a grace. reason (except, course, unlawful race), reason. And where, body engendered merely uncertainty system, subjected crime. makes sense freeze substance. Just cause complain replaced new, tough-on-crime much parsimonious him big-on-efficiency cuts back cause. irrelevant, my view, pre-existing happens embodied regulation. To constitutional turn feature ignore discourage measures promote fairness consistency. regulation, conferring complete substance hearings, simply expectation entitlement, except perhaps whose (or scheduled held) regulation effect. give rise 31 essence, complains (as review), deprived release). sides coin--two aspects discretion--and valid grievance. Souter whom Ginsburg join, dissenting. 33 think made error here respectfully dissent reversal. "sufficient," 499, substantial class serve result.1 determine lengthen sentences, look rule, mitigated exceptions. 34 Before occur 15; third 23, on. An example mandatory seen average term served old 1992, Legislature life-sentenced Spotts, Sentence Punishment: Provide Imposition Life Parole, St. 183, (1993). Some paroled delayed 15. helps effects likely end spectrum, threatens fourth wait regardless average. Georgia, controls information, nothing contrary. basis isolate subclass unlikely guaranteed define entire natural inference affects throughout class. different situation shown unsuited reconsideration. 511. point, common here. 36 significance buttressed statements chairman, available board's official website, indicating intended prison. Paroles, News Releases, http://www.pap.state.ga.us/NRFrames.htm (Jan. 2, 1998, Policy Mandates Time For Certain Offenses) ("Since 1991 steadily consistently refined guidelines lengthier service violent criminals"); Violent-Crime Lifers Who Died http://www.pap.state.ga.us/NewRelea.nsf (June 4, 1998) Chairman Walter Ray `obtaining life-sentence increasingly rare' reporting "[b]ecause strict conservative paroling policy, officials predict successive fiscal reflect rising indeed mean that").2 ever allowed undertake discovery, punitive intent forthcoming. Although never purpose absent effect, itself invalidates change, 443 (1997), certainly confirms above. is, all, get tough succeed doing that. 37 side, indication obviate useless save administrative resources, justification accepted Indeed, since means examines file hearing findings deny interpretation conserve weak best, insufficient counter manda- tory sentences.3 38 Thus, believe properly argues freely exceptions cases, provided occasional willingness reexamine sufficiently mitigates majority accepts argument practice, revisit assignment standing alone preclude challenge, surely wrong. willing rely, matter, assuming aware (and able advantage) ask mind. [a prisoner's] entirely discretionary, free standards, solely create real confinement. word absence order. none resisted discovery. sought compensate favorable lodging documents recounting date. instance occurred ruled State.4 examples equivalent broken front steps invited guest slipped, fallen, lawyer; punishment.5 40 failure least, sentences. stressed what `of moment transgress prohibition' `degree,' (citation omitted) (emphasis original). Even am wrong prevail record, plain justified altered lengths. NOTES: instance, traditionally evaluated rather focusing challenging (1981). difficult, impossible, prove quantum beyond previously received, mix rules Lindsey Washington, 301 397, 401 (1937). time, looks quite clear overall. proof enough retroactively invalid anyone As punitiveness increased, decreased. Criminal Population Increased 9% 1998; Decrease Was Persons http://www.pap.state.ga.us/ NewRelea.nsf, (Feb. 1, suggests, 7, mentioned factor true, address problem virtually unbounded scheme. Once exists, nearly nonexistent way reducing risk. insists lack irrelevant because process beside Unlike delaying includes extra explain itself. minimalism rubber-stamp treatment, decreases relies actually diminishes Penson 488 75, 81-82 (1988) (stating requirement written reasons provides inducement summarily ignored); Smith Robbins 528 __, __ (2000) (slip op., ___) (S tevens dissenting) (noting writing improves quality error). operate rigidly defined procedures, decides retroactive, something prevent statistics 1999, 20% received less; 10% got less eight, 70% Petitioners 9. Eighty percent potentially negatively delay terms, then, mitigate explains decisionmaking "[t]he overriding severity offense." Decisions Decisions.htm (visited 2000). rarely difference.

Category: 0