Legal Opinion

Gayle Duwayne Kindred v. Phillip Spears, Warden and United States Parole Commission

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided February 28, 1990No. 89-1355PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GEE, Circuit Judge:

This appeal concerns the contours of due process protection afforded a prisoner in his dealings with the Parole Commission. Succinctly, the question before us today is whether or not the Parole Commission is bound to provide contemporaneous reasons for its decisions. We hold that the Federal Parole Statute mandates such a contemporaneous reasoning requirement and that, therefore, the decision of the district court must be affirmed.

Facts and Disposition Below

In 1984, Kindred was convicted of conspiracy to transport currency, transportation of stolen currency ($700,000…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. United States v. NixonSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal & Correctional ComplexSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. Board of Pardons v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  5. Texas v. McCulloughSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. United States v. Jose Alvaro GalloCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1991
  2. Welch v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994
  3. James Charles Fenner v. United States Parole CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
  4. Victor Bono v. Michael Benov, Warden, United States Parole CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
  5. Dufur v. U.S. Parole Comm'nCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API