Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Holleman v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided March 20, 2015No. 45A03-1403-PC-90Published

1ConcurrenceBarnes, Judge

[17] I concur with my colleagues that Holleman was not denied due process arid that his parole was denied in a manner in accord with our statutes. The parole board’s discretion in these matters is “almost absolute,” as the majority notes, and its decisions are very difficult to overturn. See Holland v. Rizzo, 872 N.E.2d 659, 668 (Ind.Ct.App.2007), trans. denied. I write separately to express my opinion that, in a circumstance such as this, common sense and an overall aura of the concept called “justice” calls for a special look at this type of prisoner.

[18] Holleman is a lifer. That is, he…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Holland v. RizzoIndiana Court of Appeals · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API