Legal Opinion
Dufur v. U.S. Parole Comm'n
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided May 24, 2018No. Civil Action No. 17–677 (RDM)PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RANDOLPH D. MOSS, United States District Judge
This case presents the question whether mandatory parole in the federal prison system is mandatory. It is not. That counterintuitive result understandably led Plaintiff Artie Dufur, a pro se prisoner who is serving a parole-eligible federal life sentence, to challenge the decision of Defendant United States Parole Commission ("the Commission") denying him parole. Dkt. 1 at 2-3 (Compl. ¶¶ 2-3, 5). As relevant here, there are two paths to parole for inmates in Dufur's position. First, the Commission applies a "two-thirds" rule for what it terms…
2Cases cited60 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Preiser v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Artie Dufur v. USPCCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2022
- United States v. Ahmed AbukhatallahCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2022
- Achagzai v. Broadcasting Board of GovernorsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2018
- Comacho v. QuayDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2020
- Dufur v. U.S. Parole CommissionDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2020
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.