USPC NEWS United States Parole Commission 5550 Friendship Boulevard Chevy Chase, MD 20815 March 12, 2005

Edward F. Reilly

Question: Why is there only one person from the Parole Commission conducting the hearing? Is the Parole Commission short of staff?

Answer: At present, the Parole Commission has a sufficient number of staff to meet its statutory obligations. About twelve years ago, the Commission decided to use one examiner instead of two to conduct a parole hearing. This change applied to hearings for both federal and District of Columbia offenders. Now one examiner conducts the hearing, but the recommendation is reviewed by at least one additional examiner. There must be two concurring examiners before the recommendation is forwarded to the Parole Commissioners for a decision. Using one examiner to conduct the hearing results in significant savings in travel costs. It also allows the Commission to use its most experienced examiners to review every recommendation. This would not be possible if these examiners needed to travel and participate in-person at the hearings.

Question: What can be done if parole is denied based on inaccurate information?

Answer: Any inaccuracies in the record should be brought to the attention of the Commission. If the Commission determines that parole has been denied based on inaccurate information, the case can be reopened and, if necessary, a new hearing will be held.

Question: What can be done if parole is denied based on the lack of available programs?

Answer: Every federal institution housing District of Columbia offenders allows at least some opportunity for programming. Inmates are expected to make the most of the opportunities that are available to them. The Commission’s guidelines for DC Code offenders assume that the inmate will maintain a successful institution adjustment. Credit is given for superior program achievement only in exceptional circumstances. If superior program achievement is found, the award for superior program achievement is one-third the number of months during which the parole applicant demonstrated superior program achievement. For example, if an inmate demonstrated 24 months of superior program achievement, eight months is subtracted from both the minimum and the maximum of the guideline range. However, parole is not guaranteed if a program is successfully completed.

Question: Would the Parole Commission consider forming an outside Advisory Board?

Answer: The idea of forming an outside advisory board has much to recommend it and the Commission will carefully consider it. A final decision on the adoption of an advisory board will be announced by the next public forum in the fall of this year.

Question: Are hearings recorded? Are decisions made based on the recordings without the benefit of seeing the individual in person?

Answer: Almost all hearings are conducted in-person before a Commission hearing examiner. In some cases, the hearing is held by videoconference between the inmate at the institution and the examiner at the Commission’s office. An audio recording is made of every hearing conducted by the Commission. The hearing examiner also prepares a written summary of the hearing for the benefit of the reviewing examiner and the Parole Commissioners. The audio recording is not generally reviewed unless there is a specific question about what occurred during the hearing. The Commissioner’s decision must consider the recommendation made by the examiner who conducted the hearing and the vote of another examiner (or examiners) who review the case.

The hearing examiner conducts an in-person hearing to give the parole applicant every opportunity to point out any deficiencies in the factual record and to present any facts in mitigation of the offense or concerning personal history. The second examiner reviews the case after the hearing to ensure that all relevant information is known, that the parole guidelines are calculated correctly, and that the recommendation reflects Commission policy. Most of the time, the second examiner agrees with the recommendation of the first examiner. In the cases where there is a disagreement on the recommendation (19% of District of Columbia cases in fiscal year 2004), the disagreement may be due to new information, a difference of opinion over an interpretation of the facts, a difference of judgment as to the proper recommendation, or other factors. It should be kept in mind that the examiner panel only makes a recommendation and that the final decision rests solely with the Parole Commissioners. However, it has been relatively rare that the Commissioners choose to depart from the panel recommendations.

Question: Does the Parole Commission apply the federal parole guidelines or the DC parole guidelines?

Answer: For an inmate whose initial hearing was held prior to August 5, 1998, the Commission continues to use the guidelines of the former District of Columbia Board of Parole. For hearings held after that date, the Commission uses the guidelines contained in the United States Parole Commission Rules and Procedures Manual which can be found on the Commission’s website (www.USDOJ.GOV/USPC). These guidelines may be found at 28 CFR Section 2.80. These guidelines use the basic format of the D.C. Board of Parole guidelines, but include factors considering the risk of violent recidivism.

In the case of a revocation hearing, the Commission has incorporated the federal parole guidelines in making the reparole decisions for District of Columbia parole and supervised release violators.

Question: How many African Americans serve on the Parole Commission? How many staff are African Americans?

Answer: Two of the five Parole Commissioners are African American. About 55% of the Commission staff are African American, including nine out of fifteen hearing examiners.

Question: Why does the Parole Commission make decisions outside the guidelines?

Answer: For revocation decisions for District of Columbia offenders in fiscal year 2004, about 3% of the Commission’s discretionary decisions were above the guidelines and about 5% were below the guidelines. The Commission does not keep statistics on the departure rate for initial hearings for District of Columbia offenders. The Commission departs from the guidelines to consider factors not taken into account by the guidelines. For example, the Commission may make a decision below the guidelines to take into account diminished capacity on the part of the offender or reduced culpability. The Commission may make a decision above the guidelines because the offender is more dangerous than indicated by the guidelines or because the offense is more serious than the typical case considered by the guidelines. While the guidelines are followed in most cases, the guidelines are only guidelines and the Commission can and does depart if circumstances indicate that a departure is warranted in the interests of public safety or fairness.