Update on the September 5th rescission hearing of Shu'aib A. Raheem, from the Prison Action Network:
"Shu'aib was represented by NYC lawyer Lawrence Stern, who has been representing him since doing his trial appeal years ago. The judge denied Shu'aib Raheem's petition on the grounds that the Parole Board is empowered to reconsider its parole decisions without regard to time limits and the underlying rationale as long as the victims did not take advantage of the opportunities afforded them prior to the decision to make impact statements. His lawyer has filed a Notice of Appeal to the Appellate Division, 3rd Dept. The appeal will take several months, and the reconsideration hearing has been postponed until the appeal is decided."
(The Parole Board's approval of the release of Shu'aib A. Raheem was the turning point that led the State to withdraw from the tentative settlement in the Graziano v. Pataki case and precipitated this rescission hearing for Mr. Raheem.)
December 01, 2008
November 06, 2008
Family Empowerment Day 4/NYC
See Building Bridges for the Prison Action Network's report on Family Empowerment Day 4/NYC, including the keynote address by George B. Alexander, Chairman of the NYS Division of Parole.
November 04, 2008
Graziano v. Pataki update: November 4th 2008
Update from Robert Isseks and Peter Sell, given to the Prison Action Network:
"Initially the state moved to dismiss our case, arguing it does not belong in federal court, because federal constitutional rights were not violated. Judge Brieant denied the state's motion. There was a change in the administration, the state moved again to dismiss, Brieant denied that motion as well. Since then we’ve been involved in the discovery process. The purpose now is to amass evidence of the policy as we alleged. During this time decisions have been made in district courts in NY that disagree with Brieant’s decision, saying it does not belong in Federal court; that it may violate state law but not federal. Judge Brieant died and Judge Cathy Seibel is our new judge; we go before her the first time on Nov. 6 and the due process decision will be discussed. The case is about how it is that these commissioners, usually 3 of them, make the decisions that they make. We believe that they are made arbitrarily in accordance with a predetermined plan based on the parole commissioner's personal philosophy and not in accordance with statues. If a judge decided on 15 to life as sufficient, how does the board then reach a decision that it's not true or sufficient? If the board says because of the crime you committed you are still a danger, they are supposed to express how you are still a danger and they are not doing that, they are just saying that because the crime was done, there is a danger. We have the evidence that this is what is going on, the question is does that constitute a federal due process violation? That’s what needs to be decided before we can move forward.
The statistics show that the people who committed these violent offenses are the least likely to repeat. Those statistics refute the argument that these people who committed these crimes years ago are still a danger."
"Initially the state moved to dismiss our case, arguing it does not belong in federal court, because federal constitutional rights were not violated. Judge Brieant denied the state's motion. There was a change in the administration, the state moved again to dismiss, Brieant denied that motion as well. Since then we’ve been involved in the discovery process. The purpose now is to amass evidence of the policy as we alleged. During this time decisions have been made in district courts in NY that disagree with Brieant’s decision, saying it does not belong in Federal court; that it may violate state law but not federal. Judge Brieant died and Judge Cathy Seibel is our new judge; we go before her the first time on Nov. 6 and the due process decision will be discussed. The case is about how it is that these commissioners, usually 3 of them, make the decisions that they make. We believe that they are made arbitrarily in accordance with a predetermined plan based on the parole commissioner's personal philosophy and not in accordance with statues. If a judge decided on 15 to life as sufficient, how does the board then reach a decision that it's not true or sufficient? If the board says because of the crime you committed you are still a danger, they are supposed to express how you are still a danger and they are not doing that, they are just saying that because the crime was done, there is a danger. We have the evidence that this is what is going on, the question is does that constitute a federal due process violation? That’s what needs to be decided before we can move forward.
The statistics show that the people who committed these violent offenses are the least likely to repeat. Those statistics refute the argument that these people who committed these crimes years ago are still a danger."
September 24, 2008
Graziano v. Pataki update: September 24th 2008
As a result of the death of Judge Charles L. Brieant Jr. on July 20th, the Graziano v. Pataki case has been assigned to the Honorable Cathy Seibel.
The lawyers are scheduling the final depositions then the case should be ready for motions.
The lawyers are scheduling the final depositions then the case should be ready for motions.
September 02, 2008
Bill A09727/S6731 becomes law
Governor Paterson has signed Bill A09727/S6731 into law.
The specific provision of the Bill is to "restore to the Board of Parole the discretion, after three consecutive years of successful unrevoked parole release, to grant a discharge from parole supervision to persons who are serving an indeterminate sentence with a maximum term of life, and for whom the Board of Parole has determined that a discharge from parole supervision would be in the best interest of society".
The specific provision of the Bill is to "restore to the Board of Parole the discretion, after three consecutive years of successful unrevoked parole release, to grant a discharge from parole supervision to persons who are serving an indeterminate sentence with a maximum term of life, and for whom the Board of Parole has determined that a discharge from parole supervision would be in the best interest of society".
August 01, 2008
Family Empowerment Day 4 - NYC will be held on Saturday October 25th 2008 at the Columbia Law School
Important news from the Prison Action Network:
Family Empowerment Day 4 - NYC will be held on Saturday October 25th, 2008 from 9-4 at the Columbia Law School, with the theme "Taking Action to Bring Our Loved Ones Home".
George B. Alexander, Chairman of the NYS Division of Parole, will be the keynote speaker and will be reporting on "The State of Parole Today".
The Prison Action Network, together with a team of advisers representing parole, legislative action, and media, aim to use this platform to create a plan for a strategy to obtain fair and just parole decisions.
Family Empowerment Day 4 - NYC will be held on Saturday October 25th, 2008 from 9-4 at the Columbia Law School, with the theme "Taking Action to Bring Our Loved Ones Home".
George B. Alexander, Chairman of the NYS Division of Parole, will be the keynote speaker and will be reporting on "The State of Parole Today".
The Prison Action Network, together with a team of advisers representing parole, legislative action, and media, aim to use this platform to create a plan for a strategy to obtain fair and just parole decisions.
Interview with George B. Alexander, Chairman of the NYS Division of Parole
There will be an interview with George B. Alexander, Chairman of the NYS Division of Parole, on The Fancy Broccoli Show on 17th August 2008.
George Alexander will be taking questions from callers during the interview.
George Alexander will be taking questions from callers during the interview.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)