Legal Opinion
Smith v. United States Parole Commission
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided January 14, 1993No. Civ. No. 5-90-152 (WWE)PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON PETITION
EGINTON, Senior District Judge.
Petitioner Charles Kelvin Smith seeks declaratory and injunctive relief against the United States Parole Commission’s two-tiered system in which prisoners with sentences shorter than thirty years receive an initial parole hearing and a presumptive parole date within 120 days of incarceration while prisoners with longer sentences must wait until they have served one-third of their sentence before receiving a hearing and presumptive parole date. The petitioner claims that this distinction violates the Fourteenth and Eighth Amendments to the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal & Correctional ComplexSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Plyler v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- City of New Orleans v. DukesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Ramesh Solomon v. Robert I. Elsea, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1982
- Lombard v. Board of Education of City of New YorkDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1986
3Cited by3 opinions
- Green v. MartinDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2016
- Armour v. LamontDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2024
- Patrick v. RaemischDistrict Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 2008