Legal Opinion
Lupo v. Norton
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided February 21, 1974No. Civ. B-932, B-74-57PublishedCited by 59 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
NEWMAN, District Judge.
These cases present interesting issues concerning the procedures used by the United States Board of Parole in reaching and explaining its decisions concerning parole. The issues arise because the Board, though not constitutionally required to give any reasons for its decisions, Menechino v. Oswald, 430 F.2d 403 (2d Cir. 1970), has commendably adopted a new procedure designed to promote rationality in the decision-making process and to enhance understanding of the process by all concerned, especially prisoners. Key ingredients of the new procedure…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Williams v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- United States v. TuckerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Townsend v. BurkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- United States v. John Christopher DoyleCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1965
- United States v. Janice Weston, A/K/A Janice WallaceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by59 opinions
- Franklin v. ShieldsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1977
- Sidney F. Brown, Jr. v. David C. Lundgren, Warden, Federal Correctional InstitutionCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1976
- United States of America Ex Rel. Charles Richerson v. Dennis Wolff, Warden, Sheridan Institution, and the Illinois Parole and Pardon BoardCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1976
- Wiley v. United States Board of ParoleDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1974
- Brach v. NelsonDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1979
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.