Published: October 15, 2007 12:45 pm            

Inmates increasingly being granted parole

View from the Bench

Somerset — A report released at the end of 2006 discloses that state inmates are being paroled at an unprecedented rate.

Despite lengthy sentences handed out by state court judges and the purported “get tough” on crime mentality, which has become increasingly prevalent in recent years, state authorities are releasing convicted felons more frequently than ever before.

Parole is purely a function of the executive branch of the government; i.e., the branch headed by the governor, or when talking about the federal government, the president. Parole is not granted by the judicial branch; i.e., the courts. In fact, the courts have little or no impact on the fate of a defendant once the defendant has been sentenced. At that point, with a few limited exceptions, jurisdiction passes from the judiciary to the executive branch – usually the state Department of Corrections.

Once incarcerated in a state facility, or if the inmate is being held in a local jail through an agreement with the Department of Corrections, again with few exceptions, the decision of whether an inmate is released falls within the purview of the state Parole Board.

The Kentucky Parole Board is an independent agency attached to the Justice Cabinet for administrative purposes.

The governor appoints the seven full-time and two part-time members of the Parole Board. The members are then approved by the state Senate. According to the Parole Board, they are “the primary releasing authority for all convicted felons and youthful offenders into the Commonwealth of Kentucky.” The Board determines when to release an offender prior to the expiration of the sentence imposed by the Court, sets the conditions under which parolees must abide, and revokes those parolees who violate the conditions of parole.

Inmates are eligible to be considered for early release from prison depending on their parole eligibility date. Most offenders are eligible to be considered for parole after serving only 20 percent of their court imposed sentence. Furthermore, parole eligibility includes time the offender served prior to their conviction. Certain violent offenses require service of a greater percentage of the court imposed sentence. For example, a defendant convicted of rape in the first degree is required to serve 85 percent of the court imposed sentence before becoming eligible for parole.

The job of the Parole Board is not an easy one. The members review thousands of cases and are constantly aware of the tremendous economic burdens that burgeoning prison populations impose on taxpayers. According to the 2006 report, the prison population continues to soar, indicating that courts are increasingly sentencing criminal defendants to prison, not only more frequently but for longer terms.

In reviewing each case, the Board must determine whether to (1) defer the parole decision to a future date, (2) require the inmate to “serve-out” the court imposed sentence, or (3) grant parole and allow the inmate to be released within the community. Once released, the inmate is subject to the supervision of parole officers.

The most recent report reveals the dramatic increase in releases by the parole board. In fiscal year 1999-2000, the Board considered a total of 8,739 cases. Over 2,600, or 30 percent, were granted parole. Forward to fiscal year 2005-2006, where the Board considered 15,135 inmates for release and granted parole to 43 percent – a whopping 13 percent increase in only five years!

The increase in parolees has not been matched by a corresponding increase in parole officers. Thus, some suggest that parolees actually face less supervision from state parole officers than they did only a few years before.

Because of this, courts are sometimes in a better situation to monitor a defendant who is likely to be granted an early release. In those instances where a defendant can be placed into an intensive supervision program, such as a drug court, the Courts can provide a greater level of community supervision.

For example, local drug courts require defendants to submit to three drug tests weekly. Defendants must also come to court every week, work full time, do community service, go to group and individual counseling and do homework. The typical program lasts at least 18 months, and for some defendants, it takes much longer. Now that’s supervision!

Sometimes, inmates who are requesting release by the Courts come to regret that choice. In many respects, it’s far easier to serve a short prison sentence, be paroled, and avoid the intensive court supervised programs. Nevertheless, the Parole Board fulfills an important function in an area subject to both intense public criticism and an ever expanding prison population.

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.