(a) An initial hearing shall be conducted by a single hearing examiner unless the Regional Commissioner orders that the hearing be conducted by a panel of two examiners. The examiner shall discuss with the prisoner his offense severity rating and salient factor score as described in § 2.20, his institutional conduct and, in addition, any other matter the examiner may deem relevant.
(b) A prisoner may be represented at a hearing by a person of his or her choice. The function of the prisoner's representative shall be to offer a statement at the conclusion of the interview of the prisoner by the examiner, and to provide such additional information as the examiner shall request. Interested parties who oppose parole may select a representative to appear and offer a statement. The hearing examiner shall limit or exclude any irrelevant or repetitious statement.
(c) At the conclusion of the hearing, the examiner shall discuss the decision to be recommended by the examiner and the reasons therefor, except in the extraordinary circumstance of a complex issue that requires further deliberation before a recommendation can be made. Written notice of the decision shall be mailed or transmitted to the prisoner within 21 days of the date of the hearing, except in emergencies. Whenever the Commission initially establishes a release date (or modifies the release date thereafter), the prisoner shall also receive in writing the reasons therefor.
(d) In accordance with 18 U.S.C. 4206, the reasons for establishment of a release date shall include a guidelines evaluation statement containing the prisoner's offense severity rating and salient factor score (including the points credited on each item of such score) as described in § 2.20, as well as the specific factors and information relied upon for any decision outside the range indicated by the guidelines.
(e) No interviews with the Commission, or any representative thereof, shall be granted to a prisoner unless his name is docketed for a hearing in accordance with Commission procedures. Hearings shall not be open to the public.
(f) A full and complete record of every hearing shall be retained by the Commission. Upon a request, pursuant to § 2.56, the Commission shall make available to any eligible prisoner such record as the Commission has retained of the hearing.
[42 FR 39809, Aug. 5, 1977, as amended at 45 FR 6381, Jan. 28, 1980; 47 FR 25736, June 15, 1982; 48 FR 23183, May 24, 1983; 59 FR 45625, Sept. 2, 1994; 68 FR 41528, July 14, 2003]
Notes of Decisions
William J. Prater v. U.S. Parole Comm'n & Thomas Keohane, Warden, 802 F.2d 948 (7th Cir. 1986).
· cites it 4× “” 28 C.F.R. § 2.13 (b) (1974). The guidelines may seem not to forbid the Commission to grant parole where parole would depreciate the seriousness of the offense but merely to allow the Commission to deny parole on that ground, although it is obvious that no agency authorized to…”
Dufur v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 314 F. Supp. 3d 10 (D.C. Cir. 2018).
· cites it 2× “19 (c)(3) by depriving him of an opportunity to respond to the "aggravating circumstances" the statements purportedly laid out, and he further argues that the failure to provide him with a record of his 2004 discretionary parole hearing violated 28 C.F.R. § 2.13 . Id. Because…”
William J. Prater v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, & Thomas Keohane, Warden, 764 F.2d 1230 (7th Cir. 1985).
· cites it 3× “Prater’s initial parole hearing at the United States Penitentiary at Terre Haute, Indiana, pursuant to the provisions of 28 C.F.R. § 2.13 (1981). After consideration of the relevant factors, the panel recommended parole effective August 8,1982.”
Toolasprashad v. Grondolsky, 570 F. Supp. 2d 610 (D.N.J. 2008).
· cites it 3× “Pinner's decision to exclude live witnesses/audience under 28 C.F.R. § 2.13 (b) was dismissed. See Docket Entiy No.”
Ronnie Howard v. Caufield, 765 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2014).
“§ 4214 (e); 28 C.F.R. § 2.13 (c). As relevant here, following a parole revocation hearing, the Commission must “furnish the parolee with a written notice of its determination.”
Hearn v. Nelson, 496 F. Supp. 1111 (D. Conn. 1980).
· cites it 2× “§ 4206 ; 28 C.F.R. § 2.13 . 8 And if the Commission wishes to continue an inmate’s incarceration beyond the guidelines established for him, it must have and state specific reasons beyond those which brought the prisoner within the guidelines to begin with.”
Rosati v. Haran, 459 F. Supp. 1148 (E.D.N.Y 1977).
· cites it 2× “See 28 C.F.R. §§ 2.13 , 2.20. If the prisoner has satisfied the three statutory prerequisites to parole, 9 and is *1153 otherwise eligible, the guidelines evaluation provides the basis for the panel’s recommendation that parole be granted or denied, although recommendations…”
William J. Walker v. United States, 816 F.2d 1313 (9th Cir. 1987).
“See 28 C.F.R. § 2.13 (a). The record indicates that this information was before the Commission, and the Commission’s Notice of Action indicates that it was considered.”
Jerry Kenneth Stroud v. United States Parole Comm'n, 668 F.2d 843 (5th Cir. 1982).
“See 28 C.F.R. § 2.13 (d) (requiring offense severity rating, salient factor score, and “specific factors and information relied upon for any decision to continue such prisoner for a period outside the range indicated by the guidelines”).”
— 28 C.F.R. § 2.13(c) — 1 case
— 28 C.F.R. § 2.13(d) — 2 cases
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.