Garland v. Commonwealth (1999)
green
· 19 citation events
across 2 courts.
Showing the 6 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Steve Dismore v. Kentucky Parole Board (2024)
Garland, 997 S.W.2d at 490 (“As we have stated previously, the appellant does not have a right to parole, and the Parole Board can never be required to release the appellant before the completion of his -10- maximum sentence.”) (citations omitted). . . .
“As we have stated previously, the appellant does not have a right to parole, and the Parole Board can never be required to release the appellant before the completion of his -10- maximum sentence.”
green
James Mark Dunn v. Commonwealth of Kentucky (2022)
Garland, 997 S.W.2d at 490 (“As we have stated previously, the appellant does not have a right to parole, and the Parole Board can never be required to release the appellant before the completion of his maximum sentence.”) (citations omitted).
“As we have stated previously, the appellant does not have a right to parole, and the Parole Board can never be required to release the appellant before the completion of his maximum sentence.”
green
Martin v. Chandler (2003)
CONST. § 19(1). [20] Collins v. Youngblood, 497 U.S. at 41-2 , 110 S.Ct. at 2718-9 , 111 L.Ed.2d at 38-39 ( quoting Beazell v. Ohio ). [21] 450 U.S. 24 , 101 S.Ct. 960 , 67 L.Ed.2d 17 (1981). [22] Id. [23] Weaver v. Graham, 450 U.S. at 28-29 , 101 S.Ct. at 964 , 67 L.Ed.2d at 23 . [24] Id., 450 U.S. at 30 , 101 S.Ct. at 965 , 67 L.Ed.2d at 24 . [25] California Department of Corrections v. Morales, 514 U.S. 499 , 506 n. 3, 115 S.Ct. 1597 , 1602 n. 3, 131 L.Ed.2d 588 , 595 n. …
citations omitted and emphasis added
green
Pate v. Department of Corrections (2015)
See Garland v. Commonwealth, 997 S.W.2d 487 (Ky.App.1999).
green
Stewart v. Commonwealth (2005)
See Garland v. Commonwealth, 997 S.W.2d 487 (Ky.App.1999).
green
Pappas v. Kentucky Parole Board (2004)
See Garland v. Commonwealth, Ky.App., 997 S.W.2d 487, 489 (1999) (court holding that ”[f]inding that relevant criteria have been met does not require the parole board to release an inmate prior to the expiration of sentence; nothing in the parole statutes or regulations mandates the granting of parole or diminishes the discretionary nature of the Parole Board’s authority.”) .