Auschwitz to Attica - Methodologies of Psychological Abuse, by John MacKenzie

A thoughtful commentary on the hopelessness and despair caused by the New York State parole system, written by John MacKenzie and first published in July 2013. John was found dead in his prison cell on the morning of Thursday, 4th August 2016, a few days after receiving his tenth parole denial. Repeated parole denials and the harsh conditions in Fishkill Correctional Facility extinguished his hope and he took his own life.

Preface:

"Every prisoner with a sensitive nature suffers much more from unjust, malicious and intended psychological abuse than from physical abuse. He perceives it to be much more humiliating and depressing than any physical abuse."

"They all easily survived the hard part of camp life because they had a "reasonable assurance" that they would be free again after their time was up. There was no set prison term for political prisoners. It depended on factors, which were unpredictable.1 The prisoners knew this and that's why they suffered so much, and because of this uncertainty, life in the camp became torture for them. I spoke to many intelligent and perceptive political prisoners about this uncertainty. They all said that they could suffer all the indignities of camp life, such as the impulsiveness of the SS guards or the prison seniors in charge, the harsh discipline, living together in close quarters, the monotony of all the daily routines; all of that could be endured, all of that could be overcome, but not the uncertainty of not knowing how long they would remain in the camp. This was the most crushing blow, which paralyzed even the strongest will. From my observation, the unknown length of the sentence and its depending on the whim of low-ranking officials exerted the strongest and the most negative influence on the mental health of the prisoners." (Death Dealer – The Memoirs of the SS Kommandant at Auschwitz – Rudolph Höss – Schutzstaffel)

Commentary: 

As stated in Death Dealer, there was "reasonable assurance" that they [the prisoners] would be free again after their time was up. That belief was further advanced by the German propaganda phrase, "Work Shall Set You Free," which was conspicuously displayed over the main entrance to Auschwitz. The term "reasonable assurance" also bears a striking resemblance to the current term "reasonable probability" used in the parole statute and the term "reasonable expectation" used in other sections of the parole laws. Likewise, after comparing the effect of not knowing when one will be free with the consistent denial of parole based on the one factor that will never change, one has to wonder whether the same method of psychological torture is being systematically applied to those serving life sentences. New York prisoners generally suffer the same indignities of prison life: the pettiness, the arbitrary enforcement of rules by prison guards, the harsh discipline, living in close quarters, the monotony of repetitious daily routines, lack of meaningful choices, loneliness, ad nauseam. All of that can be endured and overcome, but New York State prisoners cannot endure the uncertainty of not knowing how long they will remain in prison.

They cannot cope with the uncertainty of not knowing when, if ever, they will be granted parole. This is a crushing blow that paralyzes even the strongest will. The unknown length of the sentence, especially after one has fulfilled all program requirements and conformed to rules and regulations, is particularly frustrating. One's freedom becomes dependent on the whim of parole commissioners; consequently these factors exert the strongest and the most negative influence on the mental health and stability of the prisoner.

Two concepts conveyed by "The uncertainty of not knowing when..." and "Without knowledge of what will be measured..."2 clearly demonstrate that both elements affect the emotional stability and overall well-being of those hoping for parole (freedom). It would also appear these terms are synonymous with the arbitrary and capricious (whim) standard of review and contribute to paralyzing even those with the strongest of will. As Davis states: "One can imagine nothing more cruel, inhuman and frustrating." Further exacerbating an already debilitating situation is not being provided with detailed reasons for the denial of parole. Not being told what one must do to improve chances of parole is not only against the legislative intent, but also contributes significantly to the emotional stress that is detrimental to one's overall mental health and well-being. Together, both of these factors amount to cruel and inhuman punishment and are contributing factors in the deteriorations of one's mental stability and serve only to foster hopelessness. It would be well to take heed of what Kenneth Culp Davis teaches: "Where law ends tyranny begins. I think that in our system of government, where law ends tyranny need not begin. Where law ends, discretion begins, and the exercise of discretion may mean either beneficence, or tyranny, either justice or injustice, either reasonableness or arbitrariness." Davis, Discretionary Justice, 3 (1969).

It would seem that history has taught us nothing about how we should treat people in a civilized society – even those being held in prison. If society wishes to rehabilitate as well as punish wrongdoers through imprisonment, then society must also ensure that "punishment" never crosses the line over to "torture." Society – through its lawmakers – must bear the responsibility of tempering justice with mercy. Giving a man legitimate hope is a laudable goal; giving him false hope is utterly inhuman.

.....................................
Notes:
1 Compare indeterminate sentences with a minimum of 15 years up to and including 25 years with a maximum of Life. Also note that contemporary laws allow for a sentence of life without parole. The distinction being with an indeterminate sentence of 25 years to life, one has a [reasonable] expectation of parole once the minimum term is served, providing program requirements have been met and one maintains a good disciplinary record. Unfortunately, the current trend is to continually deny parole even after meeting all the requirements, thus one's release is unpredictable.
2 "One can imagine nothing more cruel, inhuman, and frustrating than serving a prison term without knowledge of what will be measured and the rules determining whether one is ready for release. The probability of release on parole having been held out to most prisoners and the possibility of release to the balance, fundamental fairness would seem to dictate that rather than subject a prisoner who is denied parole to the inhumanity of ignorance the state should as a minimum due process provide him with the reasons." Davis, Discretionary Justice, 132 (1969).

Clarifying the Legislative Intent: invalidating the use of "community opposition" in the Parole Decision Process, by John MacKenzie

Before addressing the erroneous interpretation and application of the law governing the parole decision process, two legal points must be clarified and established. First - Legislative Intent as primary consideration [McKinney's Statutes §92] - The primary consideration of the courts in the construction of statutes is to ascertain and give effect to the intention of the Legislature. Hence, the legislative intent is said to be the "fundamental rule," "the great principle which is to control," "the cardinal rule" and "the grand central light in which all statutes must be read." Therefore, it is the duty of the courts to adopt a construction of a statute that will bring it into harmony with the Constitution and with legislative intent, and no narrow construction of a statute may thwart the legislative design. Second - Expression of One thing as excluding others [McKinney's Statutes §240] - It is a universal principle in the interpretation of statutes that expressio unius est exclusio alterius. That is to say, the specific mention of one person or thing implies the exclusion of other persons or things. As otherwise expressed, where a law expressly describes a particular act, thing or person to which it shall apply, an irrefutable inference must be drawn that what is omitted or not included was intended to be omitted and excluded.

The relevancy of §92 and §240 in relation to the parole decision process becomes evident after reading the statutory law governing the parole process. The standard of review with the statutory factors that must be considered are in Ex Law §259-i (2)(c)(A), which states: Discretionary release on parole will not be granted merely as a reward for good conduct or efficient performance of duties while confined, but after considering if there is a reasonable probability that, if such inmate is released, he or she will live and remain at liberty without violating the law, and that his or her release is not incompatible with the welfare of society and will not so deprecate the seriousness of his or her crime as to undermine respect for the law. In making the parole release decision, the Board of Parole must consider the following:

(i) the institutional record, including program goals and accomplishments, academic achievements, vocational education, training or work assignments, therapy and interactions with staff and inmates; (ii) performance, if any, as a participant in a temporary release program; (iii) release plans including community resources, employment, education, and training and support services available to the inmate; (iv) any deportation order issued by the federal government against the inmate while in the custody of the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, and any recommendation regarding deportation made by the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision; (v) any statement made to the Board by the crime victim or the victim's representative, ¹ where the crime victim is deceased or is mentally or physically incapacitated; (vi) the length of the determinate sentence to which the inmate would be subject had he or she received a sentence pursuant to the Penal Law sentencing provisions for certain felony controlled substance or marijuana offenses; (vii) the seriousness of the offense with due consideration to the type of sentence, length of sentence, and recommendations of the sentencing court, district attorney, the attorney for the inmate, the presentence probation report, as well as consideration of any mitigating and aggravating factors, and activities following arrest prior to confinement; and (viii) any prior criminal record, including the nature and pattern of offenses, adjustment to any previous probation or parole supervision, and institutional confinement. ²

Applying the rules of statutory construction and interpretation, it is clear that the Parole Board has invaded the legislative province and usurped legislative authority, rendering the use of "community opposition" invalid. First, conspicuously absent in the list of factors is any mention of "other person" or "private citizens." ³ Thus, what is omitted or not included was intended to be omitted and excluded. Second, since neither was intended there is no basis in legal authority or rationale that permits either to be interpreted as "community opposition."

More importantly, "community opposition" is not a listed factor. The irrefutable fact is that none of these terms are listed in the statute and thus are invalid. It should also be noted that "other person" and "private citizens" do not relate to the parole decision process, but instead, concern confidentiality of records only, hence both terms are outside the scope of the controlling statute and cannot be considered. The only person(s) listed are the "crime victim" and "victim's representative."

Additional support is found in Mayfield v. Evans 93 A.D. 3d 98 938 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept. 2012) revealing that, the Court of Appeals has long held that "[t]he Legislature may authorize an administrative agency to fill in the interstices in the legislative product by prescribing rules and regulations consistent with the enabling legislation. In practice, this has meant that "an agency [charged with the enforcement of a statute has been empowered to] adopt regulations that go beyond the text of that legislation, provided they are not inconsistent with the statutory language or its underlying purposes. Nevertheless, such "an agency cannot promulgate rules or regulations that contravene the will of the Legislature" and the express terms of the authorizing statute. Any other result would impermissibly allow an administrative agency to invade the legislative province and usurp legislative authority. Additionally, in King v. New York State Div of Parole 83 N.Y.2d 788, (1994), the court found that: "There is evidence in the record the petitioner was not afforded a proper hearing because one of the commissioners considered factors outside the scope of the applicable statute, including "penal philosophy."

Furthermore, the Board of Parole's role is not to resentence an inmate according to the personal opinions of its members as to the appropriate penalty for the crime originally committed, but to determine whether at the current time, given all the relevant statutory factors, the inmate should be released. For the Board to simply decide that any case involving the killing of a police officer automatically necessitates denial of parole because of the "seriousness of the crime" is a breach of the obligation legislatively imposed on it to render a qualitative judgment based on the review of all relevant factors. It is also worth mentioning a statement by Judge Richard Bartlett, former chief Administrative Judge, and Chairman of the Bartlett Commission, who reaffirmed the intent of the legislation as follows: "It is not the function of the Board to review the appropriateness of the sentence. That is for the court to decide. Their role is to determine the suitability of release based on the inmate's behavior while imprisoned and the likelihood of their reoffending."

In conclusion, the use of these unauthorized factors runs counter to the clear wording of the statutory provisions and legislative intent and should not be accorded any weight or allowed to be considered in the parole decision process. Simply stated any reference to terms outside the scope of the applicable statute is unauthorized. Furthermore, any opposition [community opposition] other than from that of the victim or victim's representative is in essence "penal philosophy" and is also beyond the scope of the applicable statute. A cease and desist order must be issued immediately to the Board of Parole ordering them to stop considering these unauthorized terms as factors.

Finally, regarding the integrity of the criminal justice system, a very profound and compelling statement is worth reflecting upon:

"The tortured interpretation of the statutory scheme creates a merry-go-round that will extend the incarceration of Acoli—but for no rational or just purpose. In Trantino, this Court committed the judiciary to the task of ensuring that administrative agencies not thwart the law in unpopular cases. In that case, we held that the law cannot bend to the strong winds of public opinion. Perhaps few will shed a tear that Acoli will spend more years in prison—without any legal justification—for the murder of a police officer. But this case is about more than one individual. It is about the integrity of our justice system. The rule of law must apply even to the most disfavored member of society." (Justice Albin in a dissenting opinion in a parole case from New Jersey.)

...................................................................

¹ Definitions — A crime "victim" [CPL §440.50 and Ex. Law §259-i (2) (c) (A)] means any person alleged or found, upon the record, to have sustained physical or financial injury to person or property as a direct result of the crime charged. A "crime victim's representative" means the crime victim's closest surviving relative, the committed or guardian of such person, or the legal representative of any such person.

² Recent additions include COMPAS/Risk Assessment/CASE Plan as defined in Rules and Regulations 9 NYCRR 8002.3(a) Both the statute Executive Law 259-i (2) (c) (A) and Rules and Regulations 9 NYCRR 8002.3(a) have omitted any reference to the terms relied upon by the Board to justify the use of "community opposition" as a factor in the parole decision process and it is unlawful.

³ The only place "other person" is mentioned is in Ex Law §259-i (2) (c) (B) — and "private citizens" is mentioned in 9 NYCRR 8000.5(c)(2) and neither are allowable under the applicable statute.

Nature of the Crime

Today, Monday May 18, the statewide Parole Justice Now! coalition is releasing their new film, "The Nature of the Crime," online in conjunction with its première in the state Capitol to pressure the legislature to pass the Safe and Fair Evaluations (SAFE) Parole Act.

This short documentary tells the story of how fourteen people in New York State control the freedom of tens of thousands of men and women. They are called the Parole Board and they determine whether people in prison with indefinite sentences are ready to be released.  Every year 10,000 people are denied parole. Many people are denied repeatedly – for some, this can mean up to 20+ extra years in prison – due to the "nature of their crime," something they can never change.

Current material on parole

For excellent sources of current material on parole and the need for parole reform please see:

*  Building Bridges, the monthly newsletter of the Prison Action Network. Contains up to date news, campaigns, reports and statistics on parole, as well as regular updates on the progress of the Safe and Fair Evaluations (SAFE) Parole Act from the NYS Parole Reform Campaign.

*  Petition for change, by The Riverside Church Prison Ministry:
Governor Andrew Cuomo: ESTABLISH A COMMISSION ON PAROLE TO END PAROLE ABUSES AND REUNITE FAMILIES 

*  New York's Broken Parole System (New York Times, February 16 2014)

*  Public Comments in Support of Parole Reform (Correctional Association of New York, January 2014)

Testimonies from the New York State Assembly Committee on Correction's Public Hearing on Parole Reform, December 4 2013:

*  Professor Philip Genty Testifies on Parole Procedures Before State Assembly's Correction Committee (Columbia Law School, December 6 2013) Includes full text of Professor Genty's testimony before the New York State Assembly Committee on Correction on December 4 2013

* Parole Review Process Has Serious Shortcomings, by Scott Paltrowitz (Correctional Association of New York, December 6 2013) Includes full text of the Correctional Association's testimony before the New York State Assembly Committee on Correction on December 4 2013

*  Advocates Recite Shortcomings of N.Y. Parole Review Process, by John Caher (New York Law Journal, December 5 2013)

*  Testimony of Mujahid Farid, head of the Release of Aging People in Prison (RAPP) Campaign, before the New York State Assembly Committee on Correction on December 4 2013

*  Testimony of Tina M. Stanford, Chairwoman NYS Board of Parole, before the NYS Assembly Standing Committee on Correction, Wednesday December 4 2013

*  Testimony of Anthony J. Annucci, Acting Commissioner NYS Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, before the NYS Assembly Standing Committee on Correction, Wednesday December 4 2013

Building Bridges - September/October 2013 edition

The September/October edition of Building Bridges has been issued by the Prison Action Network.

Prison Action Network's brief summary is given below. Please see Building Bridges for full details and their current news about parole, ways to help and become involved.

Summaries of articles:

1.  Parole News: August releases; News about former parole board member and chair Robert Dennison’s advocacy for certain parole applicants.
     
2.  NYS Parole Reform Campaign reports on the growing energy around the SAFE Parole Act; unveils new and easy Weekly Action readers can join.
     
3.  Ending Parole Abuse - Reuniting Families; a Campaign to Overhaul New York’s Parole System encourages public participation and invites us to their gala Kick-off event on November 8.
     
4.  We can do it! Inspiration from FAMM’s experience.

5.  End Mass Incarceration Convergence puts Prisoner Justice Network solidly on the map.
     
6.  Release Aging People from Prison (RAPP) unveils petition drive on WBAI’s Law and Disorder show.

7.  Religion, Abolition, Mass Incarceration seminar on October 4-5 includes speakers from RAPP.
   
8.  Bookends, an evening of performances inspired by incarcerated parents and grandparents, to be presented in Albany by Prison Legal Services.
     
9.  Michelle Alexander is expanding her focus to include a radical restructuring of society.
     
10.  Education from the Inside Out is beginning a new season of working to remove the barriers that keep our youth and people with criminal records uneducated.
   
11.  Part 3 in Baba Eng’s address to Building Bridges readers in which he looks at who's responsible and who is going to do something about our failed criminal justice system.

12.  Forty-two years after the Attica rebellion Prisoners Are People Too takes a look at what has changed (or not) over the four decades since then.
   
13.  Corey Parks: The race for quality has no finish line. There is always room for more improvement.

14.  Small Business Legal Academy offers free consulting day.

15.  Special screening of Herman’s House at CSS. Petition to grant him compassionate release.

Building Bridges - August/September 2013 edition

The August/September edition of Building Bridges has been issued by the Prison Action Network.

Prison Action Network's brief summary is given below. Please see Building Bridges for full details and their current news about parole, ways to help and become involved.

1.  Parole releases are averaging close to 26% for both initials and reappearances; Building Bridges gives a list of current parole commissioners and their biographies. 

In other parole news, the following is a brief summary from the highly recommended report, Parole Release Decisions and the Rule of Law, by Alan Rosenthal and Patricia Warth (Atticus, Summer 2013, Vol. 25, No. 2, p. 10-16):

"In response to the amendment of Executive Law § 259-c(4) the Parole Board took no action to establish written procedures, instead apparently relying upon the "Evans' Memo" to suffice. Upon inspection and investigation of this memo a simple truth emerges. The memo does not contain the procedures required to satisfy the 2011 amendment and it has not been promulgated by proper filing with the Department of State, the Secretary of State, or publication in the state register. Therefore any action taken by the Parole Board to deny parole to any person coming before it would be made in violation of Executive Law § 259-c(4) because it would have been made without first establishing or following proper procedures, thus inviting judicial annulment."

2.  Only four Criminal Justice bills that the Prison Action Network were following made it into law. None of them targets a subset of the prison population, and two increase benefits to victims.

3.  The campaign to overhaul NY’s failed parole system is moving forward with a meeting on September 7 to begin planning the year’s events.

4.  NYS Prisoner Justice Network takes a cautious look at the Stop and Frisk judicial decision and A.G. Holder’s speech calling for federal prison reforms.

5.  DOCCS is denying more and more women entry to the Bedford Hills' prison nursery, particularly women who have been convicted of violent crimes and women who have had child welfare involvement with other children.

6.  Merle Cooper petition signatures reach 845. There are six days left to at least be counted among those who think DOCCS should maintain programs that have proven track records.

7.  College degree program at Albion C.F. to start this summer, thanks to a $200,000 grant from the Sunshine Lady.

8.  Baba Eng follows the thread from Black Codes > criminal justice system > criminal codes > Emancipation Proclamation > 13th amendment with its exception > vagrancy (and other) laws to catch up Freed Blacks.

9.  Black August: In remembrance of Jonathan Jackson, brother of George Jackson, Mujahid Farid, the featured speaker at this month’s Prisoners Are People Too meeting, will consider how the fate of Jonathan ties into issues of juvenile justice.

10.  Corey Parks wants to convince you of your ability to become a leader after you come home.

11.  ReEntry Roundtable Wed. Sept 18, 1-3pm, "Broken On All Sides" documentary.

Letters supporting parole reform and the proposed SAFE Parole Act

Recent letters supporting parole reform and the pending legislation, Safe and Fair Evaluations (SAFE) Parole Act A4108/S1128, published by the Times Union:

Welcome parolees back into the community, by Judith Brink (Times Union, May 31 2013)
The parole board is not a resentencing body, by Judith Brink (Times Union, May 10 2013)
Parole board role is misunderstood, by Karen Kaufmann (Times Union, May 8 2013)
Bill would address parole procedures, by Anne Marie Haber (Times Union, May 7 2013)

Building Bridges - March 2013 edition

The March edition of Building Bridges has been issued by the Prison Action Network.

*** This edition of Building Bridges is dedicated to the memory of Jerry Balone, who died unexpectedly in his sleep on March 13. ***

Prison Action Network's brief summary is given below. Please see Building Bridges for full details, ways to help and get involved.

1. An apology repository exists but who knows how to find it? Do you?

2. Legislation reports: the Senate Committee on Crime Victims, Crime and Correction, with Senator Patrick Gallivan as Chair, met on Wednesday March 13, to consider 11 bills. A video recording of their meeting is given here.

3. The call to end extreme isolation as a punishment is attracting more attention every day.

4. Parole news includes December 2012 statistics, 2012 summary pt.2, an update on the Thwaites case, and changes to the leadership of DOCCS and the Parole Board.

The Thwaites decision was avoided: the issue is moot. In  2011, Orange County Supreme Court Justice Lawrence Ecker ruled in the case of Douglas Thwaites that the revision of Executive Law 259 (c) not only required the parole board to put more weight on the rehabilitation of the inmate rather than the instant offense, but he also applied the revision retroactively. The Attorney General's Office urged the Appellate Division, Second Department, to overturn the ruling. Mr. Thwaites was released before the issue was decided and not for the first time, a challenge to parole's functioning was declared moot and thereby avoided. (From CURE-NY's Winter 2013 Newsletter.)

Changes in the leadership of DOCCS and the Parole Board:
DOCCS Commissioner Brian Fischer is retiring at the end of April.
Andrea Evans announced at a Public Safety Hearing that February 6 2013 was her last day as Chair of the Parole Board, but did not clarify whether she would be staying on as a Board Member. The Prison Action Network has heard that she will continue to serve in her role as Chair until replaced by the Governor.

5. Adolescent minds are not receiving the guidance needed, says Corey Parks of SNUG.

6. Appropriate prison programming may be a reality to Fischer, but not to some intended recipients, who explain.

7. Work for Success takes its show on the road, but where does the rubber meet the road?

8. RECONNECT offers job training to women recently released from prison.

9. Job Fair invites formerly incarcerated people to explore opportunities for a second chance.

10. Prison poetry project features former participants and a panel to demonstrate the value of art in rehabilitation.

11. Veterans' Memorial Day weekend retreat and symposium will combine rest and relaxation with efforts to provide better services for incarcerated veterans.

12. Please see Reentry Resource Center: New York's calendar for details of other meetings and events.

13. Black history and culture film series every Thursday in Albany, NY.

14. Knitting supplies are needed at Woodbourne Correctional Facility.

Building Bridges - July 2012 edition

The July edition of Building Bridges has been issued by the Prison Action Network.

A brief summary is given below. Please see Building Bridges for full details:

* Electoral Politics - some suggestions to help us elect the people who are more likely to support our agenda.

* Family Empowerment Day 5 is in Buffalo this year, featuring Ebony Magazine's "2012 Couple of the Year".

* Innocent and denied parole because of it? The Jeffrey Deskovic Foundation for Justice has a plan for helping you.

* The legislative session ended in June with none of our bills being passed. A.M. Aubry, however, was able to put in a supportive word for people in prison and those who have been released, during the discussion of the Justice Center Bill which creates an agency to protect people with special needs.

* Corey's Column - in his first Building Bridges column Corey Parks describes his strategy for a successful reentry.

* Parole News reports on appointments of three new and three reappointed Parole Commissioners; an amazing Article 78; and 37 parole releases in May.

* NYS Parole Reform Campaign urges families and other advocates to become informed and get active. It's up to us. No one else cares as much.

* NYS Prisoner Justice Network reports on the Legislative Task Force on Criminal Justice Reform, proposed by the New York State Criminal Justice Advocacy and Reform Coalition made up of advocates, most of whom presented workshops at the Black and Puerto Rican Legislative Caucus this past spring. An update on the Sept.14th Event also is provided.

* Public Campaign Financing is urgently needed because the very rich think you and I are the ones who don't understand the country's problems! We have to replace the influence of big money in politics with public financing of elections, and Gov. Cuomo has said he will help us.

* In Our Name, Restoring Justice in America - the Aug. 24-26 agenda looks very inviting. Formerly incarcerated people and family members of currently incarcerated persons are offered generous scholarships. We'd love to hang out with you!

* Solitary Confinement through the eyes of Charles Dickens, author of A Christmas Carol and Oliver Twist. Shows that opposition to the use of solitary confinement has been around almost as long as solitary has.  When will the public wake up?

* Strength of a Woman. Short sentences for abusers but when a woman defends herself after years of violence and threats on her life or her children's she often receives a much longer sentence. The July 30th meeting of Prisoners Are People Too in Buffalo, focuses on this issue.

Building Bridges - June 2012 edition

The June edition of Building Bridges has been issued by the Prison Action Network.

A brief summary is given below. Please see Building Bridges for full details:

* Attica, mass incarceration, solitary confinement, freeing Mumia and others are on the agenda for the September 14 event.

* Carl Berk's daughter Paula is writing a memoir of her father and would welcome any information you can provide. Please send your information to Paula via the Prison Action Network.
   
* Call for stories to be included in WORTH's Guidebook for women returning home from prison and jail.
   
* Cornell University confers Bachelor's degrees on 14 students confined at Auburn prison. On June 5, 2012, Auburn Correction Facility presented a commencement ceremony not seen since the early 90s, back when Pell grants propelled Syracuse University and Cayuga Community College to teach behind the walls of the prison. This memorable event, all supported by private donations, presented 15 students with Bachelor degrees from Cornell University in conjunction with Cayuga Community College.
   
* Domestic Violence Legislation is being obstructed by Senate Republicans. On May 30, the Senate Democratic Conference held a public forum on the need to provide additional protections for those affected by domestic violence. The forum was convened to highlight legislation sponsored by members of the Democratic Conference which the Senate Republican Majority has refused to move out of committee and bring to the floor for a vote. Attendees at the forum included Democratic Senators as well as activists, legislators and criminal justice professionals.
 
* Family Empowerment Day 5 is coming to the Buffalo-Niagara Region, on Friday October 5 and Saturday October 6.
 
* Geriatric Parole Release bill has been passed by the Assembly's Correction Committee:
A.9696 the NYS Program for Older Prisoners Act [No same as], March 27, 2012, introduced by Members of Assembly Aubry, Lentol, Millman.
Provides geriatric parole release to an inmate who is at least sixty years of age, is serving a determinate or indeterminate sentence of imprisonment, and has served at least one-half of the minimum period of his or her indeterminate sentence, or in the case of a determinate sentence, has served at least one-half of the term of his or her determinate sentence, provided, however, that no inmate serving a sentence imposed upon a conviction for murder in the first degree or an act of terrorism shall be eligible for such geriatric parole release. Such release shall be granted only after the board considers whether there is a reasonable probability that, if released, the inmate will live and remain at liberty without violating the law, and that such release is not incompatible with the welfare of society and will not so deprecate the seriousness of the crime as to undermine respect for the law.
   
* Jeffry Descovic uses settlement money to help others wrongfully convicted.
   
* Legislation: dozens of criminal justice bills were introduced at the Senate and Assembly Committee meetings, most of them are tabled for now. See Building Bridges for full details.

* NYS Parole Reform Campaign: their report on Advocacy Days, and a letter to the Governor:

"Soon after the NY Reentry Roundtable's Advocacy Day on May 15, The Safe and Fair Evaluations Parole Act gained 4 new sponsors: Senator Hassell-Thompson, Senator Serrano, Assembly members P. Rivera and Scarborough. There are now 9 sponsors in the Assembly and 7 in the Senate. Not bad for a bill that's only 1 year old! Readers who have called, written, or visited their legislators and/or shown up for Lobby Day events can take the credit for this. If any of the sponsors represent your district, please thank them. The more appreciation they get for doing the right thing, the less strength the bill's opponents have. Tom Duane, who introduced it in the Senate, is not seeking reelection so we will have to find another Senator to introduce it next year, as well as speak to A.M. Aubry about reintroducing it. We will miss Tom Duane; he has always been a champion of just causes. If you have any information on Brian Kavanaugh, Brad Holyman or Corey Johnson, who are rumored to be interested in running for his seat, please let us know. Prison Action Network is trying to find out where they stand in the battle over NYS criminal justice policies. Contact information for the last two would be especially appreciated. If you know any of them please ask them where, on a scale of 1 - 5 they stand: (1. being "lock em up and throw away the key" and 5. being "treat prisoners as you want them to treat us, and use evidence-based practices such as alternatives to prison whenever possible")."

See Building Bridges for the text of their letter to Governor Cuomo, urging the Senate and the Assembly to vote for the Safe and Fair Evaluations (S.A.F.E.) Parole Act, and for Cuomo to incorporate it into the 2013 Budget Act.
   
* Parole News - Expired terms and April parole releases.
   
* Prisoner Justice Network reports on their May 22 Prison and Parole Justice Day.
   
* Raise the age of criminal responsibility in NYS to 18. The Center for Community Alternatives and the NY Reentry Roundtable host discussions in June.
   
* Restoring Justice in America retreat offers scholarships to their weekend symposium in Greenwich N.Y.
   
* Transportation Service starts up in Albany.

Building Bridges - May 2012 edition

The May edition of Building Bridges has been issued by the Prison Action Network.

A summary is given below, please see Building Bridges for full details:

1. Carl Berk Remembered. A friend remembers that "He normally submitted a poem to one of the Jewish Newsletters or Lifers' notes. We didn't receive one for February." We share a prose poem, inspired by Hemingway, that Carl sent us shortly before his death.

2. Building a Better Criminal Justice System. The Fortune Society and The Sentencing Project are collaborating on a panel discussion about The Sentencing Project’s recent publication, To Build a Better Criminal Justice System: 25 Experts Envision the Next 25 Years of Reform. In the new publication, 25 leading scholars and practitioners have contributed essays on their strategic vision for the next 25 years of criminal justice reform. Issues addressed in the collection include racial justice strategies, linking public health and criminal justice reform, challenging the war on drugs, and the viability of fiscal pressures as a focus for reform.

3. Clemency, a discussion: "Among its benign if too-often ignored objects, the clemency power can correct injustices that the ordinary criminal justice process seems unable or unwilling to consider."

4. The Merit Time Bill falls victim to questionable tactics, while ill-advised bills continue to be scheduled for voting at the Senate's Crime Victims, Crime and Corrections Committee on May 15. Building Bridges also reports on the fate of bills presented to the Committee on April 18.

"The Merit Time Bill S338/A154, sponsored by Senator Velmanette Montgomery and co-sponsored by Senator Dilan is no longer sitting in the Senate Crime Victims, Crime and Corrections Committee. Due to a troubling turn of events, it has been reported to the Rules Committee, headed by Majority Leader Dean Skelos, where it will sit probably forever, or at least until the end of this session." (See Building Bridges for full details.)

Please sign the petition in support of the Merit Time Law.

5. Parole News: March releases (reappearance rates are up), excerpts from two articles by John Caher, and a report from the NYS Parole Reform Campaign. "The Campaign has been working with the organizations who have put the SAFE Parole Act on the agenda for their legislative advocacy days. We're very grateful for the support we’ve received from these and other organizations! We've come a long way since last year at this time when our bill was just a proposal and removing nature of the crime from what the parole board could consider was believed to be too radical and so controversial that no one would touch it. We now have legislative sponsors, and many people are seeing that without this bill violent offenders with "incredible prison records" and the lowest risk scores on COMPAS, will continue to be denied parole."

6. Prisoners Are People Too! "Broken On All Sides: Race, Mass Incarceration and New Visions for Criminal Justice in the US." Karima Amin gives details of this important new film about the US prison system.

7. The NYS Prisoner Justice Network reviews the bad news and the good news and invites us to join them in a day of action: NYS Prisoner Justice Network's Prison and Parole Justice Day, in Albany, on May 22nd.

8. In Our Name: Restoring Justice in America, a retreat in beautiful upstate NY, is open to families and friends of incarcerated people and formerly incarcerated persons. This August weekend gathering of academics, activists, and advocates will work together to formulate proposals for reform of the criminal justice and penal systems. We need to share our input.

9. The Yale Law Journal welcomes submissions for their first prison law writing contest.

10. A call for stories from adult children of incarcerated, or formerly incarcerated, parents.

11. Justus Support Group forms in Troy NY.

Effect of Risk Assessment Rule on Parole Decisions Is Unclear

Extract from a report by John Caher, reviewing the impact of recent changes in the parole statute:

ALBANY - A new law requiring the state parole board to consider inmates' rehabilitation and use a "risk assessment" procedure to gauge whether parole-eligible inmates have reformed appears to be having little effect as release rates are largely unchanged and the board is routinely basing its denials on boilerplate statutory language emphasizing the offense, records suggest.

In October, the panel was legislatively required to "incorporate risk and needs principles to measure the rehabilitation of persons appearing before the board, the likelihood of success of such persons upon release."

The board did so, but advocates say the new process appears to have no impact.

"My experience has been it doesn't matter because most of the guys are scoring the lowest risk assessment level and they are still hitting them and saying they are a threat to society," said Cheryl Kates, an attorney near Rochester whose practice consists of advocating for inmates seeking parole. "It doesn't make any sense. They've added an evidence-based procedure but still cite the statute the same way they did previously. It is just a façade. It is status quo."

Similarly, Edward Hammock, a former parole board chairman who now practices criminal law, much of it post-conviction, said he has not seen any change.

"It is my impression that nothing is really happening," Hammock said. "Why do a risk assessment if you are not going to deal with it when considering someone for release?"

Part of the problem is that there is uncertainty about why the statute was changed and what the revision was supposed to achieve. It is not clear if the revision represents a sea change in the operations of the parole board, a tweak of one of the existing factors it takes into consideration, or something in between ... ...

For complete report, see:
Effect of Risk Assessment Rule on Parole Decisions Is Unclear, by John Caher (New York Law Journal, April 30 2012)

See also:
Judge Finds Parole Risk Assessment Not Retroactive, by John Caher (New York Law Journal, May 21 2012)
Acting Supreme Court Justice Mark Fandrich wrote: "While the changes may modernize the parole laws, there is no indication that they were intended to correct any past oversight or clarify the law in any way."
Inmate Loses Parole Bid Despite his 'Incredible Prison Record', by John Caher (New York Law Journal, April 24 2012)
Matter of Thwaites v New York State Bd. of Parole 2011 NY Slip Op 21453
Matter of Hamilton v New York State Div. of Parole 2012 NY Slip Op 22112

Building Bridges - March 2012 edition

The March edition of Building Bridges has been issued by the Prison Action Network.

This edition contains their report on several important bills voted for at the meeting of the Senate Crime Victims, Crime and Correction Committee on March 7 including the Merit Time Bill (detailed in the introduction and in Article 5 of their newsletter). There are serious reservations about the possibility of the SAFE Parole Act becoming law while Michael Nozzolio is the chair of that committee, and the Prison Action Network explain why.

This is the result of the vote on the Merit Time Bill:

S329-2011*: DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ELIGIBILITY FOR MERIT TIME
Sponsor: Montgomery, Co-sponsors: Hassell-Thompson, Krueger, Oppenheimer, Parker, Serrano
Allows certain inmates who are able to prove that they were subjected to substantial physical, sexual or psychological abuse, that the abuse was inflicted by a member of their same family or household or a member of the person's immediate family, and that the abuse was a substantial factor in causing them to commit the crime to be eligible to earn merit time in the amount of one-third off either their minimum sentence (if inmate has an indeterminate sentence) or their flat sentence; allows such inmates to be eligible for presumptive release; expands the criteria that a person in custody of the department of correctional services may meet in order to earn merit time. - NOT REPORTED (defeated)

S338-2011*: EXPANSION OF MERIT TIME
Sponsor: Montgomery, Co-sponsors: Dilan [Same as: A154-2011 - Aubry]
Relates to controlled substances and indeterminate sentences; relates to the expansion of merit time and repeals provisions relating to the allowance of limited credit time for inmates; to allow all inmates, except those serving a sentence of life imprisonment without parole, murder in the first degree, incest, an offense defined in article two hundred sixty-three of the penal law, an act of terrorism, aggravated harassment of an employee by an inmate, or an attempt or conspiracy to commit any such offense, to earn merit time allowance. The merit time allowance would be one-sixth of an indeterminate and one-seventh of a determinate sentence. This section of the bill also expands the criteria that a person in the custody of the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) may meet in order to earn merit time. HELD

Other items discussed in the March newsletter include the following. See Building Bridges for full details:

1. ALBANY UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL: A free workshop to develop legislative advocacy skills will involve interactive role play and practical tips.

2. THE BLACK, PUERTO RICAN, HISPANIC AND ASIAN CAUCUS's Criminal Justice Workshop series was a huge success and proof of the momentum that is building. People are realizing that incarceration is a justice issue, and in particular a racial justice issue.

3. CALL OUTS: A group of advocates is looking for those affected to join efforts to end the abuse of SHU. Cornell Law School is seeking interviews with formerly and currently incarcerated women about their experiences.

4. CAMPAIGN TO END THE NEW JIM CROW has issued a statement of solidarity with the Occupy movements. All of the 99% stand to win when injustice is uprooted.


5. Criminal Justice LEGISLATION was presented for a vote by the Senate's Crime Victims, Crime and Correction Committee meeting on March 7. Listed are 22 of the bills including the votes. Prison Action Network was there. It was not a pleasant experience.


6. NY IS STILL IN NEED OF PAROLE REFORM Applying old backward-looking static factors while attempting to follow the new dynamic procedures for parole release decision-making based upon present and future-looking risk and needs principles creates a contradiction that the Parole Board will find very difficult to reconcile.

7. PAROLE NEWS: In January no A1VO was released on their initial board. 23% of those reappearing were granted release. Thwaites saw a de novo Board in March.


8. PRISONER JUSTICE COLUMN Last month's Mass Incarceration article reprinted including sections which were mistakenly omitted last month.


9. The National Action Network's Political Action & Second Chance Committees are hosting a ROCKEFELLER DRUG LAWS FORUM for those who want to know more about what the Rockefeller Drug Laws are, and about the Criminal Justice Reform Movement.

10. 2012 REMOVING THE BARS: "TAKE ACTION" Conference will include a Parole 101 panel discussion on Saturday March 24 from 2:15 to 3:45pm and a presentation by Angela Davis on Friday night.


11. SECOND LOOK THINK TANK from Sullivan C.F. concludes that New York State’s public safety levels—in other words, the recidivism rate—and the state’s fiscal hemorrhaging can be linked, at least in part, to the parole release decisions made by the Parole Board .


12. STAINS:CHANGING LIVES AFTER INCARCERATION is a documentary about life after incarceration, as seen from the families' perspective.

13. A COMMUNITY DIALOGUE ABOUT WOMEN AND REENTRY, Coming Home: Struggling Towards Success. Moderated by Piper Kerman, with panelists Tish, Selina Fulford, Mary McKay, Sister Mary Nerney. Special Guest Manhattan Borough President Scott M. Stringer.

14. WORK FOR SUCCESS, an initiative by Gov. Cuomo, is aimed at reducing unemployment rates for people returning home from prison. CEO will be the model program. Many advocates and legislators support this approach.

NY DOCCS Moves Toward Supervising Parolees by Risk Level

Extract from report by the Upper Manhattan Reentry Task Force (UMRTF):

... Historically, NY DOCCS (Division of Corrections and Community Supervision) has employed a static risk assessment ("DCJS Risk") to assign individuals being released to the community a risk level. The assessment looked at age, gender, and history of criminality to determine the risk of a parolee's recidivism. The assessment did not take into account the attitudes and beliefs of individuals leaving prison, one of the prime predictors of recidivism. Therefore, unless the individual had "aged out" of criminal activity, he/she was considered to be the same risk that he/she was prior to his/her prison term. Once released to the community, Field Parole Officers supervised all parolees similarly, independent of risk, until he/she got to know the client personally and made adjustments to the client's supervision mandates.

Now, DOCCS is in the midst of implementing some massive changes. As I learned at a County Reentry Task Force Meeting this past Friday, February 28, 2012, as of March 1, 2012, every individual being paroled from all NY DOCCS facilities will receive an actuarial risk assessment called "COMPAS Reentry." The COMPAS tool, created by Northepointe, Inc., "a research and consulting firm, offering software products, training, and implementation services to local, state, and federal criminal justice systems and policy makers," measures standard risk factors in combination with reentry domains such as early onset of delinquency, history of non-compliance, occurrences of prison misconduct, substance abuse, the risk of housing problems, criminal thinking, etc. The COMPAS then calculates a client's risk of recidivism and risk of absconding, and offers a personalized client needs scale to parole officers and case managers that can be used to prioritize case planning and supervision.

NY DOCCS will be using the risk numbers produced the COMPAS tool to determine how intensively parolees will be supervised. DOCCS has created four risk level designations (Levels 1-4) that will be assigned to a parolee based on his/her COMPAS score. Each Bureau Chief across the state will determine how to divide up parolees on a PO's caseload using the risk levels. For instance, a Bureau Chief can determine that a PO will supervise only cases that are assigned one risk level. A high risk caseload may consist of 25 parolees, while the lowest risk caseload may consist of as many as 120 parolees. DOCCS did not give us an estimate regarding how long this transition to the level system will occur.

We also learned, that by statute, the Parole Board must now receive a risk assessment of every inmate that goes before them. This risk assessment will be the COMPAS. ...

For complete report, see:
NY DOCCS Moves Toward Supervising Parolees by Risk Level (Re-thinking Reentry, 28 February 2012)

DNA and Reform

Governor Andrew Cuomo's proposal to expand New York State's DNA database by requiring all convicts to submit a sample should be accompanied by other reforms to reduce wrongful convictions.

See:
An Incomplete DNA Deal (New York Times Editorial, 26 March 2012)
DNA and Reform (New York Times Editorial, 24 February 2012)
NYSACDL Opposes DNA plan (New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, February 23rd, 2012)

New York Parole Violation Sentencing Procedure Found Unconstitutional for Serious Crimes

Under state law, individuals who are arrested on a parole violation have a constitutional right to a hearing to determine whether the violation has occurred.

For most cases, this means that a judge determines 1) if a violation has occurs and 2) the parolees sentence.

However, in some cases, where the individual is in parole for a more serious crime such as a homicide, sex crime, or kidnapping, New York State parole division rules makes the hearing officer's decision a "recommendation that can be overriden by a single member of the state parole board."

Pursuant to a recent decision made by the Appellate Division of the New York State Court, that practice is unlawful.

The court held on Tuesday that the "parole rule amounts to a 'usurpation of the legislative perogative'" which intended that hearing officers have the final authority on a parolee's sentence.

The unilateral decision of the single member of the parole board not only contravenes the intent of the legislature, but violates due process.

If the ruling stands, all sentencing determinations for parole violations will be made by a hearing officer.

From:
NY parole procedure invalid, unconstitutional: state appeals court (Thomson Reuters News and Insight, 14 February 2012)
NY Parole Violation Sentencing Procedure Found Unconstitutional for Serious Crimes (Re-thinking Reentry, 16 February 2012)

Governor praises Senate passage of DNA databank expansion

The state Senate has emphatically passed legislation that would expand New York's criminal DNA database.

Senators voted 50-10 on Tuesday to pass the DNA Databank Expansion Bill, which would, if signed into law, require people convicted of all crimes - including misdemeanors - to submit DNA samples to the state's DNA databank. Currently, only someone convicted of a felony, or one of 36 specific misdemeanor charges, is required to submit a DNA sample.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo urged the Assembly to act quickly to pass the bill, which he called "an important step in protecting New Yorkers and modernizing the state's criminal justice system."

Cuomo's 2012-13 executive budget included a proposal similar to the Senate bill.

Full article:
Gov. praises Senate passage of DNA databank expansion (Adirondack Daily Enterprise, February 1 2012)

Governor Andrew Cuomo made the following statement, released after the vote: "Today the New York State Senate passed the DNA Databank Expansion Bill, an important step in protecting New Yorkers and modernizing the state’s criminal justice system. This critical crime fighting resource embraces technology to help protect the innocent and convict the guilty. I want to thank Senators Golden and Saland for sponsoring this legislation. I call on the Assembly to do the same so I can sign this bill into law immediately."

Related articles:
New York State Set to Add All Convict DNA to Its Database, by John Eligon and Thomas Kaplan (New York Times, March 13, 2012)
Cuomo blesses Senate DNA bill (Capitol Confidential, January 31 2012)
Albany Bill to Expand DNA Database Fuels a Political Fight (New York Times, January 31 2012)
State Senate passes bill to greatly expand New York's DNA database; spotlight shifts to the Assembly (New York Daily News, January 31 2012)
Building a New NY... with you: 2012 State of the State Address, Governor Andrew M. Cuomo (January 4 2012)

Building Bridges - January 2012 edition

The January edition of Building Bridges has been issued by the Prison Action Network.

Articles in this issue include the following:

1. Crime After Crime, a powerful documentary film about a woman who was sentenced to 25-Life for her role in the death of her abusive boyfriend. She and a pair of pro-bono rookie attorneys take viewers with them as they encounter the corrupt and politically driven twists and turns of the criminal justice system. Free showing includes discussion with one of the lawyers and the legislators who are sponsoring the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act, A7874/S5436.


2. Legislation - Update on the status of last year’s major CJ bills. Most are back in committee, starting over, but some have made significant movement:

A7782/S5427 - Aubry/Hassell-Thompson BAN THE BOX BILL
Was reintroduced in the Assembly and then sent to Investigations and Government Operations.

S0107/A5355 - Montgomery/Aubry EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES
Was vetoed by Senate Crime Victims, Crime and Corrections Committee last session. It’s been referred back to the Committee this session, and also to the Assembly’s Crime Committee.

S0338/A0154 - Montgomery/Aubry MERIT TIME BILL
Has been referred back to the Crime Victims, Crime and Corrections Committee where it was defeated last session.

S0476-A/A7870 - Nozzolio/Tediso $7 CO-PAYMENTS FOR PRISON MEDICAL CARE
Was referred back to the Assembly where it died, and was returned to the Senate where it was sent to the Crime Victims, Crime and Corrections Committee.

S2057 - Kruger no Assembly bill 85% OF MINIMUM (of an indeterminate sentence) MUST BE SERVED.
Has not been reintroduced so far.

S3537/A07015 Griffo FIVE MEMBER BOARDS FOR VOS
Referred to Senate Crime Victims, Crime and Corrections Committee, amended, and sent back, but not reintroduced in Assembly so far.

S3645-C/A 7015-B - Griffo/Spano “BRITTANY’S LAW” VFO REGISTRY
Died in Assembly, sent back to Senate, referred to Crime Victims, Crime and Corrections Committee.

S3747/A8478 - Nozzolio/Giglio FRP BILL
Died in Assembly, returned to Senate, referred to Crime Victims, Crime and Corrections Committee.

S5374/A7939 - Duane/Aubry THE SAFE PAROLE ACT
Senator Perkins and Assembly Members Stevenson, Farrel, and Gottfried have added their names as sponsors.

3. NYS Parole Reform Campaign invites readers to attend their workshop at the Black, Puerto Rican, Hispanic and Asian Legislative Caucus Weekend, on February 18 in Albany. This is part of a series of social, civil and criminal justice workshops.


4. NYS Prisoner Justice believes these are the worst of times and the best of times. The best is the many movements and campaigns that are working to solve social problems by providing people with positive opportunities to realize their potential and contribute to their communities. The worst is that after hundreds of years racism is still thriving, now through the mass incarceration of predominately poor and Black people. We haven’t won the war, but we haven’t lost it either.


5. Parole News takes five pages to report this month! November and December statistics; a year-end summary; memo to the Parole Board from Chairwoman Evans; Thwaites and Graziano court decisions.

6. Prisoners of the Census - a victory! Prisoners will be counted in their home districts for redistricting purposes. Kudos to the Prison Policy Institute which was instrumental in exposing the inequities of counting prisoners where they are incarcerated.

Parole Board Ordered to Apply Retroactively Rehabilitation Factor

Extracts from article:

A judge has ordered the state parole board to retroactively apply a new provision requiring it to consider the rehabilitation of an inmate and not base a denial of release on an offense that may have occurred decades in the past.

The decision, if upheld, could entitle scores of inmates to new parole interviews.

Orange County Supreme Court Justice Lawrence H. Ecker, in what he says is a case of first impression, reviewed a recent revision of Executive Law §259(c), and held that a man who came up for parole before a change in the law is nonetheless entitled to benefit from that law.

The revision requires the parole board to look beyond the instant offense and consider whether the applicant for parole has been rehabilitated.

In Matter of Thwaites v. New York State Board of Parole, 2011 NY Slip Op 21453, Justice Ecker said the board, in denying the inmate's release, relied on "past-focused rhetoric, not future-focused risk assessment analysis." He directed the parole board to afford Douglas Thwaites a new interview ...

... Justice Ecker said there is no question the board did not apply in Mr. Thwaites' case standards that had yet to take effect. Regardless, he said the "remedial" objective of the legislation requires reconsideration of the inmate's parole bid.

For complete article, see:
Parole Board Ordered to Apply Retroactively Rehabilitation Factor, by John Caher (New York Law Journal, 27 December 2011)

In a new decision on January 26 2012, Judge Lawrence H. Ecker handed down an almost identical ruling in the case of Newlly Velazquez as he did for Douglas Thwaites, one month previously. See:

Judge Orders Parole Board to Reconsider Release Bid, by John Caher (New York Law Journal, 6 February 2012)

An update on the Thwaites case, 20 September 2012: the New York State Attorney General's Office is appealing Justice Lawrence H. Ecker's ruling to the Second Department in Matter of Thwaites v. New York State Board of Parole, arguing that the ruling "stands to wreak havoc on the parole system" and that the "Legislature cannot plausibly have intended to apply the changes to parole practices to past parole board decisions". See:
A.G. Urges Court to Upset Parole Interview Decision, by John Caher (New York Law Journal, 20 September 2012)