Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

COLEMAN v. BROWN, 01-cv-01351-TEH (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20170621c32 Visitors: 5
Filed: Jun. 20, 2017
Latest Update: Jun. 20, 2017
Summary: THREE-JUDGE COURT ORDER SUSPENDING PARAGRAPH 4(B) OF FEBRUARY 10, 2014 ORDER STEPHEN REINHARDT , Circuit Judge . THELTON E. HENDERSON , Senior District Judge . KIMBERLY J. MUELLER , District Judge . UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT COMPOSED OF THREE JUDGES PURSUANT TO SECTION 2284, TITLE 28 UNITED STATES CODE The court has reviewed the parties' June 6, 2017 stipulation and proposed order to modify the court's February 10, 2014 order based on emergency regulations establishing a nonviolent
More

THREE-JUDGE COURT

ORDER SUSPENDING PARAGRAPH 4(B) OF FEBRUARY 10, 2014 ORDER

THELTON E. HENDERSON, Senior District Judge.

KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT COMPOSED OF THREE JUDGES PURSUANT TO SECTION 2284, TITLE 28 UNITED STATES CODE

The court has reviewed the parties' June 6, 2017 stipulation and proposed order to modify the court's February 10, 2014 order based on emergency regulations establishing a nonviolent offender parole process.1 The court agrees that it would be wise to avoid duplication of effort between the newly adopted process and the court-ordered parole process for nonviolent second-strike offenders, but it disagrees that vacating the court-ordered parole process is appropriate before permanent regulations are adopted.

Accordingly, pursuant to the parties' stipulation as modified, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The nonviolent offender parole process will go into effect on July 1, 2017. Defendants will stop referring inmates to the Board of Parole Hearings ("Board") for the court-ordered parole process on June 30, 2017. Any inmates who have been referred to the Board for parole consideration under the court-ordered process on or before June 30, 2017, will be reviewed under the court-ordered parole process. If they are not approved for release as a result of a referral made on or before June 30, 2017, they will be considered for referral under the nonviolent offender parole process one year later and annually thereafter.

2. Defendants will continue to report to the court regarding the status of the court-ordered nonviolent second-strike offender parole measure and will report when the Board processes all referrals received before July 1, 2017, under that process. The parties agree that, at that time, defendants will have complied in full with paragraph 4(b) of the court's February 10, 2014 Order, and that section of the order shall then be suspended.

3. Defendants shall implement the nonviolent offender parole process described in the parties' June 6, 2017 stipulation. They shall include in their monthly reports the status of that measure, including the number of inmates referred to the Board, the number of inmates approved for release, and any substantive changes resulting from regulatory or other State proceedings. Defendants shall also report to the court when permanent regulations concerning the nonviolent offender parole process have been adopted. At that time, the court will entertain a revised stipulation to vacate paragraph 4(b) of the February 10, 2014 Order.

4. The remaining provisions of the court's February 10, 2014 Order, as modified by the November 14, 2014, December 19, 2014, and March 4, 2016 orders, including any applicable waivers of state law, are unchanged.2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. The parties' stipulation refers to a "nonviolent parole process." While any parole process should, of course, be nonviolent, the word "nonviolent" more appropriately modifies "offender" in this context.
2. The parties included the incorrect date — November 19, 2014 — for one of the orders and did not include the December 19, 2014 order, which the court entered pursuant to the parties' stipulation.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer