Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 33.16.100 (2026)
Granting of discretionary parole
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 33.16.100. Granting of discretionary parole.
(a) The board may authorize the release of a prisoner who is otherwise eligible under AS 12.55.115 and AS 33.16.090(a)(1) on discretionary parole if it determines a reasonable probability exists that
(1) the prisoner will live and remain at liberty without violating any laws or conditions imposed by the board;
(2) the prisoner's rehabilitation and reintegration into society will be furthered by release on parole;
(3) the prisoner will not pose a threat of harm to the public if released on parole; and
(4) release of the prisoner on parole would not diminish the seriousness of the crime.
(b) If the board finds a change in circumstances in a prisoner's preparole reports listed in AS 33.16.110(a), or discovers new information concerning a prisoner who has been granted a parole release date, the board may rescind or revise the previously granted parole release date. In reconsidering the release date, the procedures set out in AS 33.16.130 shall be followed.
(c) [Repealed, § 32 ch 2 SLA 2005.]
(d) [Repealed, § 32 ch 2 SLA 2005.]
(e) [Repealed, § 179 ch 36 SLA 2016.]
(f) [Repealed, § 138 ch 4 FSSLA 2019.]
(g) When considering a prisoner for release on discretionary parole under AS 33.16.090(a)(2), the board may release a prisoner if, taking into consideration the prisoner's likelihood of recidivism given the prisoner's age, criminal history, behavior in prison, participation in treatment, and plans for reentering the community, a reasonable probability exists that
(1) the prisoner will live and remain at liberty without violating any laws or conditions imposed by the board;
(2) the prisoner's rehabilitation and reintegration into society will be furthered by release on parole;
(3) the prisoner will not pose a threat of harm to the public if released on parole; and
(4) release of the prisoner on parole would not diminish the seriousness of the crime.
(h) If the board considers an application for discretionary parole and denies parole because the prisoner does not meet the standards in (a) or (g) of this section, the board may make the prisoner ineligible for further consideration of discretionary parole or require that additional time be served before the prisoner is again eligible for consideration for discretionary parole.
(a) The board may authorize the release of a prisoner who is otherwise eligible under AS 12.55.115 and AS 33.16.090(a)(1) on discretionary parole if it determines a reasonable probability exists that
(1) the prisoner will live and remain at liberty without violating any laws or conditions imposed by the board;
(2) the prisoner's rehabilitation and reintegration into society will be furthered by release on parole;
(3) the prisoner will not pose a threat of harm to the public if released on parole; and
(4) release of the prisoner on parole would not diminish the seriousness of the crime.
(b) If the board finds a change in circumstances in a prisoner's preparole reports listed in AS 33.16.110(a), or discovers new information concerning a prisoner who has been granted a parole release date, the board may rescind or revise the previously granted parole release date. In reconsidering the release date, the procedures set out in AS 33.16.130 shall be followed.
(c) [Repealed, § 32 ch 2 SLA 2005.]
(d) [Repealed, § 32 ch 2 SLA 2005.]
(e) [Repealed, § 179 ch 36 SLA 2016.]
(f) [Repealed, § 138 ch 4 FSSLA 2019.]
(g) When considering a prisoner for release on discretionary parole under AS 33.16.090(a)(2), the board may release a prisoner if, taking into consideration the prisoner's likelihood of recidivism given the prisoner's age, criminal history, behavior in prison, participation in treatment, and plans for reentering the community, a reasonable probability exists that
(1) the prisoner will live and remain at liberty without violating any laws or conditions imposed by the board;
(2) the prisoner's rehabilitation and reintegration into society will be furthered by release on parole;
(3) the prisoner will not pose a threat of harm to the public if released on parole; and
(4) release of the prisoner on parole would not diminish the seriousness of the crime.
(h) If the board considers an application for discretionary parole and denies parole because the prisoner does not meet the standards in (a) or (g) of this section, the board may make the prisoner ineligible for further consideration of discretionary parole or require that additional time be served before the prisoner is again eligible for consideration for discretionary parole.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 46
cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1987–2025 · leading case: Hayward v. Marshall, 603 F.3d 546 (9th Cir. 2010).
Hayward v. Marshall, 603 F.3d 546 (9th Cir. 2010). “[59] Alaska Stat. § 33.16.100 . [60] Id. § 33.”
Reyes v. State, 978 P.2d 635 (Alaska Ct. App. 1999). “In such cases, defendants become eligible for parole (under the conditions set out in AS 33.16.100) after they have served the unadjusted presumptive term for their most serious offense (minus credit for good time).”
Cheely v. State, 861 P.2d 1168 (Alaska Ct. App. 1993). “We turn now to Cheely’s argument that Judge Souter had insufficient reason to restrict his parole eligibility. When a sentencing judge restricts parole eligibility, the judge must set forth with particularity his or her reasons for concluding that the parole eligibility…”
Gilbert M. v. State, 139 P.3d 581 (Alaska 2006). “AS 33.16.100(c). Gilbert is thus assured of incarceration for nine years and ten months from July 8, 2004.”
Thomas v. State, 413 P.3d 1207 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “Under AS 33.16.100(a), the Parole Board is authorized to grant a defendant discretionary parole only if it affirmatively finds that (1) the prisoner will live and remain at liberty without violating any laws or conditions imposed by the board; (2) the prisoner's rehabilitation…”
Newell v. State, 771 P.2d 873 (Alaska Ct. App. 1989). “See AS 33.16.100. By restricting Newell's parole during the entire period of his twenty-year sentence, the court has substantially increased this portion of Newell's sentence beyond what the legislature has mandated.”
Trevor Stefano v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr. & Earl Houser, in an Off. capacity, 539 P.3d 497 (Alaska 2023). “060(a)(2); AS 33.16.100. 3 AS 33.16.090. 2 7675 determine if the prisoner should be released on discretionary parole.”
State v. Korkow, 314 P.3d 560 (Alaska 2013). “16 When a prisoner becomes eligible for discretionary parole, it may be granted by the Parole Board under the standards set out in AS 33.16.100. 17 B. Korkow's Sentence At Korkow's sentencing hearing following his first-degree murder conviction, the superior court made a worst…”
Barrett v. State, 772 P.2d 559 (Alaska Ct. App. 1989). “See AS 33.16.100(a)(3) (discretionary parole limited to those who are not dangerous); AS 33.”
Smith v. State, Dep't of Corr., 872 P.2d 1218 (Alaska 1994). “AS 33.16.100(a) (emphasis added). The purpose of the parole hearing is to allow the discretionary parolee an opportunity to persuade the board that he should be released on parole.”
Collins v. State, 778 P.2d 1171 (Alaska Ct. App. 1989). “AS 33.16.100(d). Thus, at the earliest Collins could be released, if we disregard the possibility that good time computation might affect parole eligibility, he would be over fifty-nine years old.”
Harmon v. State, 908 P.2d 434 (Alaska Ct. App. 1995). “090 and AS 33.16.100(c)-(d) is insufficient to protect the public and insure the defendant’s reformation.”
— Alaska Stat. § 33.16.100(a) — 14 cases
Thomas v. State, 413 P.3d 1207 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “Under AS 33.16.100(a), the Parole Board is authorized to grant a defendant discretionary parole only if it affirmatively finds that (1) the prisoner will live and remain at liberty without violating any laws or conditions imposed by the board; (2) the prisoner's rehabilitation…”
Smith v. State, Dep't of Corr., 872 P.2d 1218 (Alaska 1994). “AS 33.16.100(a) (emphasis added). The purpose of the parole hearing is to allow the discretionary parolee an opportunity to persuade the board that he should be released on parole.”
State v. Korkow, 314 P.3d 560 (Alaska 2013). “16 When a prisoner becomes eligible for discretionary parole, it may be granted by the Parole Board under the standards set out in AS 33.16.100. 17 B. Korkow's Sentence At Korkow's sentencing hearing following his first-degree murder conviction, the superior court made a worst…”
Frank v. State, 97 P.3d 86 (Alaska Ct. App. 2004).
Ridgely v. State, 739 P.2d 1299 (Alaska Ct. App. 1987).
— Alaska Stat. § 33.16.100(a)(1) — 3 cases
Trevor Stefano v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr. & Earl Houser, in an Off. capacity, 539 P.3d 497 (Alaska 2023). “060(a)(2); AS 33.16.100. 3 AS 33.16.090. 2 7675 determine if the prisoner should be released on discretionary parole.”
James S. Stoneking v. State of Alaska, 567 P.3d 725 (Alaska Ct. App. 2025).
Larry Mikell v. State of Alaska (Alaska Ct. App. 2025).
— Alaska Stat. § 33.16.100(a)(3) — 3 cases
Barrett v. State, 772 P.2d 559 (Alaska Ct. App. 1989). “See AS 33.16.100(a)(3) (discretionary parole limited to those who are not dangerous); AS 33.”
Cynthia Lord v. State of Alaska, 489 P.3d 374 (Alaska Ct. App. 2021).
James S. Stoneking v. State of Alaska, 567 P.3d 725 (Alaska Ct. App. 2025).
— Alaska Stat. § 33.16.100(a)(4) — 4 cases
Thomas v. State, 413 P.3d 1207 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “Under AS 33.16.100(a), the Parole Board is authorized to grant a defendant discretionary parole only if it affirmatively finds that (1) the prisoner will live and remain at liberty without violating any laws or conditions imposed by the board; (2) the prisoner's rehabilitation…”
Larry Mikell v. State of Alaska (Alaska Ct. App. 2025).
James S. Stoneking v. State of Alaska, 567 P.3d 725 (Alaska Ct. App. 2025).
Thomas v. State (Alaska Ct. App. 2018).
— Alaska Stat. § 33.16.100(b) — 1 case
Trevor Stefano v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr. & Earl Houser, in an Off. capacity, 539 P.3d 497 (Alaska 2023). “060(a)(2); AS 33.16.100. 3 AS 33.16.090. 2 7675 determine if the prisoner should be released on discretionary parole.”
— Alaska Stat. § 33.16.100(c) — 19 cases
Gilbert M. v. State, 139 P.3d 581 (Alaska 2006). “AS 33.16.100(c). Gilbert is thus assured of incarceration for nine years and ten months from July 8, 2004.”
Harmon v. State, 908 P.2d 434 (Alaska Ct. App. 1995). “090 and AS 33.16.100(c)-(d) is insufficient to protect the public and insure the defendant’s reformation.”
Dayton v. State, 120 P.3d 1073 (Alaska Ct. App. 2005).
Stern v. State, 827 P.2d 442 (Alaska Ct. App. 1992).
Hinson v. State, 199 P.3d 1166 (Alaska Ct. App. 2008).
— Alaska Stat. § 33.16.100(d) — 12 cases
Cheely v. State, 861 P.2d 1168 (Alaska Ct. App. 1993). “We turn now to Cheely’s argument that Judge Souter had insufficient reason to restrict his parole eligibility. When a sentencing judge restricts parole eligibility, the judge must set forth with particularity his or her reasons for concluding that the parole eligibility…”
Reyes v. State, 978 P.2d 635 (Alaska Ct. App. 1999). “In such cases, defendants become eligible for parole (under the conditions set out in AS 33.16.100) after they have served the unadjusted presumptive term for their most serious offense (minus credit for good time).”
Gilbert M. v. State, 139 P.3d 581 (Alaska 2006). “AS 33.16.100(c). Gilbert is thus assured of incarceration for nine years and ten months from July 8, 2004.”
Collins v. State, 778 P.2d 1171 (Alaska Ct. App. 1989). “AS 33.16.100(d). Thus, at the earliest Collins could be released, if we disregard the possibility that good time computation might affect parole eligibility, he would be over fifty-nine years old.”
Gustafson v. State, 854 P.2d 751 (Alaska Ct. App. 1993).
— Alaska Stat. § 33.16.100(h) — 2 cases
Larry Mikell v. State of Alaska (Alaska Ct. App. 2025).
James S. Stoneking v. State of Alaska, 567 P.3d 725 (Alaska Ct. App. 2025).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.