In Re Powell

I dissent.

There is no substantial evidence to justify the rescission of Gregory Powell’s parole date. The majority, however, say that substantial evidence is not necessary; any evidence will do to uphold the decision of the Board of Prison Terms (BPT). Since substantial evidence is legally defined as evi*907dence that will persuade a reasonable person, the majority’s decision means that evidence which would persuade only the unreasonable is sufficient to deprive a prisoner of his grant of parole. This is a holding with which I cannot agree.

But in this case even the majority’s insubstantial…