There's a bill on parole in fla legislation. does anyone know the details on what the bill says?
145960
The FL legislature starts here.\nhttp://www.leg.state.fl.us/Welcome/index.cfm
1176099
I can rant about this all night if you want.\n\nThe simple, central fallacy is that writing laws will solve problems.  Commit a wrongdoing = go to jail.  In jail for a felony?  Get rehabilitation.  Good time and behavior = release.\n\nIt's a system designed by politics to punish threats to society.  We don't know what we're doing on the subject of rehabilitation, we're guessing.  ANOTHER set of laws deal with probation and sentencing length and release dates.\n\nSo the system as a whole is a sloppy political fingerpainting.  Ugh.  Nobody thinks they have honestly been rehabilitated and represent no threat whatsoever upon release.  kubuki theatre.
700935
I googled "sentencing guidline manuals + state" and lots of them came up. Some were very informative and some...not so much.  Since I don't know what state you want a manual for I won't send you tons of links.\nGood luck!!!
906780
it may seem lax to you (and indeed it is so) but the reason behind it is most likely that the system is so overloaded that he just fell through the cracks.  i come across defendants everyday that the record keeping division of the prison system claims the defendants have paroled while the institutional division (and the parole division) claim the def is still in prison......and they actually are still in prison.
1094156
contact your state .f.b.i.   office on this matter they can tell you the lawsdiffer from state to state . this is fact on tis matter....
867615
Here is the complete Parole Board in NYS.\n\nDennison, Robert   -  Chairman \nClarke, Vanessa A. \nGailor, Marietta S. \nSmith, Walter Wm., Jr. \nVizzie, R. Guy, Jr. \nLoomis, Debra J. \nJohnson, George C. \nCrowe, William R. \nGrant, Thomas P. \nLazzari, Livio \nFerguson, James \nGallivan, Patrick \nHernandez, Christina \nLudlow, G. Kevin \nGreenan III, Gerald J. \nArena, Jennifer \nCroce, Alan J. \nOrtloff, Chris\n\n\nOr you can go here:\n\nhttp://www.correctionhistory.org/html/chronicl/croce/croceonparole.html
1066877
*&*&*\nu can find it right here\n\nTHIS IS THE MOST RECENT HR 372 FROM THE 109TH CONGRESS!!!  OKAY?!11\n\n  The Library of Congress > THOMAS Home > Bills, Resolutions > Search Results \n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nTHIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     GO TO\nNext Hit        Forward           New Bills Search\nPrev Hit        Back              HomePage\nHit List        Best Sections     Help\n                Contents Display   \n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nBill 1 of 1000 \nGPO's PDF Display Congressional Record References Bill Summary & Status Printer Friendly Display - 4,788 bytes.[Help]  XML Display\n[Help]\n  \n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nTo include in St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida, the land and facilities comprising St. Marks lighthouse. (Introduced in House)\n\nHR 372 IH \n\n\n109th CONGRESS\n\n1st Session\n\nH. R. 372 \nTo include in St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida, the land and facilities comprising St. Marks lighthouse. \n\n\nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\n\nJanuary 26, 2005\nMr. BOYD introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned \n\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\nA BILL\nTo include in St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida, the land and facilities comprising St. Marks lighthouse. \n\n\nBe it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,\n\nSECTION 1. INCLUSION OF LIGHTHOUSE IN ST. MARKS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, FLORIDA.\n\n(a) Revocation of Executive Order Dated November 12, 1838- Any reservation of public land described in subsection (b) for lighthouse purposes by the Executive Order dated November 12, 1838, as amended by Public Land Order 5655, dated January 9, 1979, is revoked.\n\n(b) Description of Land- The public land referred to in subsection (a) consists of approximately 8 acres within the external boundaries of St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge in Wakulla County, Florida, that is east of the Tallahassee Meridian, Florida, in Township 5 South, Range 1 East, Section 1 (fractional) and containing all that remaining portion of the unsurveyed fractional section, more particularly described as follows: A parcel of land, including submerged areas, beginning at a point which marks the center of the light structure, thence due North (magnetic) a distance of 350 feet to the point of beginning a strip of land 500 feet in width, the axial centerline of which runs from the point of beginning due South (magnetic) a distance of 700 feet, more or less, to the shoreline of Apalachee Bay, comprising 8.0 acres, more or less, as shown on plat dated January 2, 1902, by Office of L. H. Engineers, 7th and 8th District, Mobile, Alabama.\n\n(c) Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction- Subject to subsection (e), administrative jurisdiction over the public land described in subsection (b), and over all improvements, structures, and fixtures located thereon, is transferred from the department in which the Coast Guard is operating to the Secretary of the Interior, without reimbursement.\n\n(d) Inclusion in Refuge-\n\n(1) INCLUSION- The public land described in subsection (b) shall be part of St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge.\n\n(2) ADMINISTRATION- Subject to subsection (e), the Secretary of the Interior shall administer the public land described in subsection (b)--\n\n(A) through the Director United States Fish and Wildlife Service; and\n\n(B) in accordance with the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et s
753476
The rules vary in every state, so it is hard to give you a definite answer but if you visit the appropriate state forum at http://www.prisontalk.com someone will be able to tell you exactly what the rules are and how to get this done.\nGood luck
810547
If on probation,are parole.I would say yes.
875051
The problem with 83 seems to be that it is too vague about "sex offenders".  It could create problems like one case I heard about where a 20 year old had sex with a 16 year old.  He was convicted of statutory rape.  They continued seeing each other and later got married.  They had children.  Now he is not allowed to be near his own children without supervision.  I know it's an odd case, but still, the proposition is too vague (doesn't specify sex-with-child offenders).  It could affect someone who had to take a leak on the side of the highway and got arrested for indecent exposure.  I'm all for harsh punishment of rapists and molesters, but I think I'd still vote "no" on this one and make them clean it up and re-submit.\n\nProp 90 looks like a good bill on the surface, but apparently has some clauses in it that could create a lot of problems.  It has to do with protecting property owners from imminent domain seizures by the government simply to put in a business that would be "better" for the community.  However, it also gives the property owner too many grounds on which to sue for lost property value.  It would be a lawsuit nightmare and the taxpayers would end up footing the bill.  I think I would vote "no" on that and try to get another bill written that really would protect the rights of property owners.\n\nDisclaimer: I don't live in California so take what I say with a grain of salt.
554560
The rules on what can or can not be done vary from state to state, and sometimes from court to court within a state.  The only way to get a real answer is to contact an attorney who does criminal law in your city/county.  \n\nYour husband may be entitled to a public defender on the parole violation.  Check with the public defender's office.\n\nContact the attorney he had at his criminal case.\n\nCall the local county bar association and ask if they have a referral service for criminal cases.
891615
It's being challenged on its housing restrictions. Most of the bill to length sentences for child molesters has already been signed into law. The authors have already backtracked and admitted that they made a mistake when they didn't write the initiative clearly enough not to apply retroactively. While that may fly in some states like New York, New Jersey, Iowa and Georgia, in California, it does not. We may not be a fully blue state but we're far from a red state. We take our constitutional rights seriously, and there are many pissed off people fighting this initiative in court. \n\nThe California Department of Corrections is also not real happy about the parolees not being able to live within 2000 feet of schools and parks. It is saying it might have to build housing at public expense to house them - something like $132 million to start. This in a state which already has a multi billion budget (the governor didn't solve the budget problem - he just borrowed the funds by floating bonds.)\n\nAlthough 70 oercent of voters cast yes votes on it, the courts frown on initiatives that are popular but unconstitutional. Another example was an initiative which banned all public services to illegal aliens in 1994. The public voted for it; the courts threw it out. \n\nI agree with the 2nd poster - it is time for the legislators to stop trying to legislate these kinds of laws. They only look like idiots, especially when they can't even write the initiatives right.\n\nAlso below is a link to a Los Angeles Times editorial against Proposition 83. \n\nhttp://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-jessica12nov12,0,4249584.story?coll=la-opinion-leftrail
1138287
I believe this is parole for a person that has committed a felony 1st through 3rd degree.
734481
Stop listening to politicians promising to "get tough on crimes."   They get elected, then enact mandatory minimums, which take away the power from the judges to rule on individual cases.   If you get caught with a joint in some states, you get five years.   You lose your wife, kids, house, car, job.   And the taxpayers get to support that person.   Drug laws are the worst in this country.   Check out the November Coalition's web site to see thousands of people busted for stupid drug laws, thousands we support, thousands of lives wasted.\nThere will soon be legislation to release elderly prisoners (non-violent), as they are the most expensive to house because of their medical problems.   I hope that people will support this.\n\nMy 65 year old husband was screwed over by the parole board four years ago, and we are still trying to get it straightened out.   Meanwhile, your tax dollars have paid for his shoulder surgery, knee replacements and dental.    I know of many other older prisoners who just want to go home and chill.   They are worn out and are no threat to anyone.      Most of them got into trouble for crimes back in the 1970's, which is nothing compared to the gangbanger drive-by street punks today.    They just want some peace and quiet and fresh air, and to die where someone cares about them.  \n\nIf these older guys were released, it would help the financial burden immensely.    The families would then be responsible, but trust me, we don't mind.
49187
quote:\n\nthe so called criminal justice system is the worse crime in america. for alot of reasons\n.....\n\nfor example???.. dont you love it when people say something stupid.. and dont even have the courtesy to expound on it.. ??\n\n\nwell sure.. lets just let all the killers out of their cells.. sex offenders?.. lets just drop them off at the nearest playground.... jeez.. \n\nback to the initial question now that its out of my system...\n\nno its not right to send an innocent man to prison.. but.. no ..its not a poor vs rich issue either.. not only does the US government pay for the lawyers .. they pay for the lawyers who try to keep you out of prison.. isnt that funny?..\n\n>>your brother.. if in fact innocent.. has many options to pursue here. legal aide is available to anyone.. the government lets you appeal cases all the time. over and freaking over.. spending large amounts of money and court time....\n\n>>bottom line sir.. i dont buy your story.. its either fictional or there are some other factors involved...\n\nother factors involved.. i just did a post on this .. from another question.. \n\nrarely are people innocent for anything.. contrary to belief.. police dont just pick someone out of crowd and say "hes the murderer".. your brother almost certainly was involved in something that you are failing to meniton or are not aware of.. i stake my reputation on that... \n\ni have sympathy for you.. but i dont for your brother.. \n\nif in fact that he is innocent.. and is released upon an appeal.. there is a crime commited here.. you are correct.. its called "wrongful prosectuion".. which is generally settled through monetary means.. police and states attorneys are not going to be sent to jail for doing there job.. sorry to disapoint you.. \n\nbut im sorry to say that it is 99% unlikely that he is not guilty.. \n\ni think your scenario is fictional because you are leaving out some key details.. \n\njury.. ?.. murderers are tried by 12 carefully selected peers and agreed upon by both the prosecution and the defense teams.. \n\na jury has to unanomously agree in guilt or innocence.. which goes back to my point about this scenario being highly unlikely.. \n\nif the story is true.. however.. i think you are a naiive young man to believe your brothers absolute and total innocence.. but i admire you for it nevertheless.. my sister would sell me out for a nickel..\n\n-----\ntattydragon.. just guessing.. but im willing to bet you have been on the wrong side of the law once or twice.. you protest too much..
358186
I'm contacting the Louisiana House of Representatives to help pass Bill#307.It will allow second degree murder convicts who have served at least 20 years with a good conduct record the possibility of parole.
414436
He is in Cororan Prison in California.  He past parole attempts have been denied for reasons such as drug trafficking, arson and assault of a prison guard.  His next opportunity for parole is in 2007.