When a parole board grants a parole request, it also sets the conditions of parole. Those conditions will be in a parole agreement—basically a contract outlining where the parolee will live and work during parole and establishing rules the parolee must follow to remain in the community.
Many parole conditions are standard and apply to all or most parolees. Common parole conditions include:
Others parole conditions are imposed case by case and are specifically tailored to the offender. Examples of these special parole conditions include:
If a parolee violates any conditions, the parole officer will generally report the violation to the parole board or another supervising authority. For minor violations, the parole officer may be authorized to impose certain sanctions and handle the matter. Other violations will typically go before the parole board to decide whether to impose sanctions, modify the conditions, or revoke parole. Revoking parole means the parolee heads back to prison.
Parole and probation are similar but not the same. They occur at different times during the criminal justice process and involve different institutions.
When ordering probation, a judge allows the convicted defendant a chance to serve their sentence in the community, rather than behind bars. Parole, on the other hand, is post-incarceration release and isn’t part of the sentence. A parole board may grant parole after an inmate has already served part of their sentence in prison.
Both probation and parole often come with conditions. And a violation of those conditions can mean time behind bars. For probationers, a judge will decide whether to revoke probation and send the person to prison. In the case of parolees, usually, the parole board makes revocation decisions for violations.
Though there are helpful online resources for state and federal former prisoners, consider seeking the help of an experienced attorney if you want to fully understand or enforce your rights.
]]>Answer: Many prisoners can get time off—that is, a reduction of their sentences—by behaving well. In the federal system, prisoners who, in the judgment of the Bureau of Prisons, have exhibited “exemplary compliance with institutional disciplinary regulations” can get up to 54 days per year off their sentences. Prisoners are eligible if they are serving a prison term of more than one year; those serving life sentences are ineligible. Earning or making progress toward a high-school diploma or the equivalent is a factor that weighs in favor of time off. (18 U.S.C. § 3624(b).)
]]>With the abolishment of federal parole, it was expected the USPC’s responsibilities would diminish as the number of federal parolees decreased. But over the years, several laws placed new prisoners under its jurisdiction.
This article will provide a brief overview of federal parole and the USPC’s continuing role.
Congress eliminated parole, in part, due to concerns of unpredictable outcomes in sentencing. A prisoner given a 20-year sentence could sometimes be released on parole after only a few short years. Even though the parole board had to consider each prisoner's likelihood of committing another crime, Congress was concerned about the release of potentially dangerous convicts who hadn't spent enough time behind bars.
A new system of sentencing guidelines and supervised release took its place to offer a more predictable and equitable sentencing system.
The number of federal parolees continues to decrease. But several laws put the USPC in charge of release decisions for other offenders. The USPC has jurisdiction over the parole or release of the following groups of prisoners.
The first group consists of prisoners mentioned above—those who committed crimes before November 1, 1987. The elimination of parole did not apply to these prisoners because they were legally eligible for parole hearings at the time of their convictions. This cohort is a relatively small (and decreasing) population of fewer than 2,000 prisoners, but their cases still come up for parole board hearings and require parole supervision when released.
Since 1997, the federal parole board has also supervised the parole and supervised release of those convicted of felonies and serving sentences in the District of Columbia (D.C.). (Offenders who are released to nearby states are supervised by state parole officers in those jurisdictions). Parole violation hearings are handled by the federal parole authority or the state equivalent if a state is supervising the prisoner.
Lastly, the federal parole board has jurisdiction over:
For the offenders under its jurisdiction, the USPC continues to:
The USPC also contracts with other agencies to perform services. For instance, the U.S. Office of Probation and Pretrial Services notes that its officers supervise certain individuals released by the USPC.
If you have questions regarding federal supervised release or parole, speak with a criminal defense attorney whose defense work includes federal crimes. For more information on the history of federal parole and the jurisdiction of the USPC, check out the USPC's website and this report written by the Government Accountability Office.
]]>I live in an area with a lot crime. Some of my friends say they have to be really careful—or they have to go to drug treatment or do community service—because they're on "probation" or "parole." Can you tell me what these words mean, and whether there's a difference between probation and parole?
I see why you're confused. Not only do probation and parole both start with the letter "p," but they both represent ways for people convicted of crimes to live out in society while under some form of supervision. What's more, they're both conditioned on good behavior—if the offender messes up, they're shown back to their cell.
But there is a major procedural difference between probation and parole. Probation is part and parcel of the offender's initial sentence, whereas parole comes much later, allowing the offender early release from a prison sentence.
Probation is handed down by the judge at the time of sentencing. It doesn't have to come with jail time but can. The judge will specify restrictions on the offender's activities during the probationary period.
Parole is granted by a parole board, after the offender has served some—or perhaps a lot of—time. The parole board may consider factors such as the offender's behavior in prison and level of rehabilitation and let him or her out early. The parole board can also specify restrictions on the person's activities while on parole.
by: Sara J. Berman
Whereas parole boards grant early release in the state system, federal courts impose supervised released during sentencing; supervised release is the part of the defendant’s sentence that follows time behind bars. The court isn’t required to order supervised release in most cases, but the federal sentencing guidelines recommend a term of supervised release in most felony cases (cases involving prison terms longer than one year).
Federal courts have to order a period of supervised release in cases involving first-time domestic violence offenders, certain drug and sex offenses, and kidnapped children.
Generally, federal judges are allowed to use their discretion in deciding the length of supervised release—as long as they don’t exceed the maximum the law allows.
Maximum terms. For the most serious felonies (class A and B felonies, such as murder), the maximum term is five years. Less serious felonies (class C and D felonies–bank robbery, for example) carry a three-year maximum. And in cases involving misdemeanors and the least serious felonies (class E felonies, such as filing a fraudulent income tax return or failing to pay child support), supervised release can’t exceed one year.
Minimum terms. Some crimes force courts to impose a minimum period of supervised release—these include serious offenses like kidnapping a child and various drug- and sex-related offenses.
Before deciding whether to impose a term of supervised release and how long to make it, federal judges must considered certain factors. These include:
Where a judge sentences a defendant for multiple crimes and orders more than one term of supervised released, the terms will run concurrently rather than consecutively.
Example: Ralph, a Canadian citizen, is in the U.S. illegally. After a DUI conviction, the government deports him back to Canada. Several months later, Ralph slips back across the border and takes up residence in New York City. He goes back to his old habits and is once again arrested for drunk driving. This time, police also find a stolen firearm in his car. In federal court, Ralph is convicted of illegal reentry into the U.S. (a class E felony) and possession of a stolen firearm (a class C felony). In addition to a prison sentence, the judge imposes supervised release terms of one year for the illegal reentry conviction and three years for the stolen-firearm conviction. Because the supervised release terms run concurrently, when Ralph gets out of prison he will have to serve three years of supervised release.
A federal court can often sentence a defendant to probation—but not always. The judge typically can’t opt for probation where:
Federal judges who don’t order prison time must sentence first-time domestic violence offenders to probation.
The length of a probation term depends primarily on the seriousness of the offense. For felonies, the length of probation must be at least one year and not longer than five years. Misdemeanor probation also has a five-year maximum, but no minimum. Probation terms for infractions can’t exceed one year.
In deciding whether to order probation and the length of any probation term, federal judges must consider—in addition to the factors involved in supervised release decisions—the need for the sentence to:
Federal judges need also take into account the kinds of sentences available for the offense.
The potential conditions of supervised release and of probation are essentially the same. Federal judges must order certain conditions for all defendants, whether supervised release or probation is involved. These typically include the defendant’s:
Courts must order first-time domestic violence offenders to participate in domestic violence rehabilitation programs. They must order sex offenders to comply with sex offender registration requirements.
Federal courts have broad discretion to order additional conditions that are reasonably related to:
But conditions can’t restrict a defendant’s liberty any more than is reasonably necessary, and they must be consistent with the U.S. Sentencing Commission's policy statements.
The federal sentencing guidelines recommend that judges order, in addition to the required conditions, certain “standard” ones. These include:
Other standard conditions prohibit the defendant from drinking too much, hanging out in areas where drugs are used and sold, and associating with criminals.
The federal sentencing guidelines also recommend “special” conditions for specific offenses. For instance, suppose the defendant is or had previously been convicted of a felony or an offense involving a dangerous weapon. In that situation, the guidelines recommend that the judge prohibit the defendant from possessing a firearm or dangerous weapon. (For a related issue, see Can someone possess a gun after a criminal conviction?) Somewhat similarly, the guidelines recommend that judges require defendants who have committed financial crimes to provide their probation officers with access to their financial records.
There are also special conditions that might require a defendant to:
If you face criminal charges—whether in the state or federal system—make sure to consult a qualified attorney who practices in that system. Such a lawyer can more fully advise you of the law and explain how it applies to your situation.
]]>But when people get out of prison on parole, they agree to comply with certain conditions. State laws often specify the conditions. And a common condition is that the parolee has to submit to searches by law enforcement.
Very few cases in the federal system involve parole—in its place now is supervised release, which also carries conditions. Federal statutes give courts discretion to create special conditions for people on supervised release, and submitting to warrantless searches can be one such condition. (U.S. v. Hanrahan, 508 F.3d 962 (10th Cir. 2007); 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d).)
Courts often consider parolees to be in “constructive custody” of the government. In other words, courts have the view that the government has control over parolees even though the former prisoners are out in society. And courts believe that the government has a valid interest in keeping tabs on its parolees. So, warrantless searches that would have been illegal had ordinary citizens been involved are often lawful where parolees are the subjects.
Another rationale for allowing warrantless, suspicionless searches of parolees is the perspective that parole is a privilege rather than a right. Parole doesn’t come automatically: Inmates typically become eligible for it and then have to be granted it. Along these lines, most courts find that parolees have less of a right to privacy than other members of society. (U.S. v. Massey, 461 F.3d 177 (2nd Cir. 2006); Samson v. California, 547 U.S. 843 (2006).)
Search conditions typically say that former offenders agree to submit to searches of themselves, their residences, and their vehicles or property. Courts might find that searchable “property” includes electronic possessions, like an email account. (Sullivan v. Bunting, 975 N.E.2d 999 (Ohio 2012).)
Sometimes a parole search must be based on “reasonable cause” or “reasonable suspicion” of unlawful activity. Often, though, the search doesn’t require that kind of basis. Law enforcement generally can’t, however, perform searches just to harass.
While search conditions often list the supervising officer as the one who may conduct searches, other law enforcement officers may also be allowed to perform them. Even when an agreement doesn’t specifically authorize searches by other members of law enforcement, a court might determine that police officers may conduct searches that supervising officers could. (For example, see U.S. v. Woodland, 607 F.Supp.2d 904 (C.D. Ill. 2009).)
Example: Sam is a parolee. His state's law says that every parolee “shall agree in writing to be subject to search or seizure by a parole officer or other peace officer at any time of the day or night, with or without a search warrant and with or without cause.” An officer sees Sam on the street. The officer knows Sam is on parole, but asks him whether he has an outstanding warrant. Sam says “no,” and the officer makes a call. The officer confirms that there is no warrant. The officer then searches Sam anyway. During the search, he finds a bag of methamphetamine. The search doesn’t violate Sam’s constitutional rights: The officer was allowed to search him because of his parole condition. (Samson v. California, 547 U.S. 843 (2006).)
If you are on parole or supervised release, you might be wondering about the contents of your release agreement and the laws regarding searches in your jurisdiction. Especially if you’ve been accused of violating parole or the law, an experienced attorney is a good bet for an explanation of the rules, your rights, and your options.
]]>Parole involves the discretionary release of a prisoner before the end of their sentence. Time spent on parole is generally spent in the community under supervision. Being granted parole isn't guaranteed; release is up to a parole board.
Being eligible for parole isn’t the same as being granted parole. Most states require inmates to serve a certain portion of their sentence before parole will even be considered. Once eligible for parole, the inmate can go through the process of asking for parole. Every state’s parole application process is different—with some requiring an extensive application and hearing process and others being more of a formality.
Parole eligibility differs from place to place; each jurisdiction specifies when a prisoner becomes eligible for consideration. And not all crimes are eligible for parole.
Often, parole boards consider prisoners for parole only after they've completed a certain portion of their prison sentences, such as one-third or one-half of the maximum sentence imposed. If the judge imposes a minimum sentence, some states require an inmate to serve the entire minimum sentence, while others allow an inmate to shave time off their minimum sentence. (See "Good Time" below).
The severity of the current offense (and, sometimes, previous offenses) often affects when or if an inmate is eligible for parole.
In Louisiana, for example, eligibility dates are based on a number of elements, including:
For a first non-violent felony, eligibility may begin after the offender serves one-quarter of the sentence. But an offender with a second felony may have to serve two-thirds of the sentence before becoming eligible. Those with three or more felonies may not be eligible for parole at all. (La. Rev. Stat. § 15-574.4 (2022).)
Another factor that may affect eligibility is the conduct of the prisoner while behind bars. In Colorado, for example, an offender may be able to get an earlier eligibility date as a result of good behavior or progress toward goals. Misconduct during imprisonment, on the other hand, may lead to a later eligibility date. (Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 17-22.5-403, -405 (2022).)
If the maximum sentence length is a life sentence, in order to determine eligibility dates, states may look at factors that include:
State law may also dictate a straightforward minimum term that must be served before an offender serving a life sentence is parole eligible, such as 30 or 40 years. These situations apply only to life sentences with the possibility of parole.
When an inmate enters prison, prison officials will often calculate possible parole eligibility dates based on the inmate’s record and state law. This date typically represents the earliest the inmate can be released IF granted parole. And the date can be pushed out for inmates who commit disciplinary violations or crimes in prison or who don’t complete the eligibility requirements (such as completing counseling).
As an inmate’s parole eligibility date approaches, the inmate will typically start preparing for the parole board hearing. The inmate might need to fill out forms stating why they should be granted parole. And the parole board will likely request court records, prison documents, and interview transcripts.
If a prisoner is eligible for parole, the parole board will follow a prescribed process to determine whether to actually grant this release. Each state uses different procedures.
In Colorado, for instance, after an eligible offender applies for parole, the parole board conducts an application hearing. During the hearing, the board will consider:
The victim of the crime may be able to attend the hearing.
(Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 17-2-214, 17-22.5-404 (2022).)
After the parole hearing, the board will decide whether to grant or deny parole.
If the board grants parole, a few more steps must be completed before the inmate is released. For instance, the inmate will need to agree to conditions of parole and sign a parole agreement. And a parole officer must be assigned to monitor the inmate’s transition into the community and supervise the inmate’s compliance with the parole agreement.
Generally, if parole is denied, the board will indicate when the inmate becomes eligible for another parole review and will list factors the inmate needs to work on. An inmate may be able to appeal a denial.
No. Not all states use parole systems. Some states use a different system of supervised release after a person completes their prison sentence. For example, a state might require inmates to serve a set portion of their prison sentences behind bars (say two-thirds) and the remainder on supervised release in the community (one-third). In the federal system, supervised release has generally replaced parole. While parole is generally at the discretion of a parole board, supervised release is usually required once an inmate meets the statutory requirements.
Parole is complicated, and the laws that govern differ greatly. If you have questions about parole or supervised release, consider consulting a criminal defense attorney who knows the relevant state or federal system. Online research might also provide you with some basics on your state, such as checking out the website for a state's parole board.
]]>Supervised release provides a period of restricted freedom for recently released prisoners (often between one and five years). A federal judge will set the supervised release term (duration) and conditions at the time of sentencing. Although not mandatory for most crimes, judges impose supervised release in approximately 75% of cases.
During supervised release, the defendant must abide by the conditions of release and be supervised by a probation officer. A former prisoner who violates the conditions of supervised release may be sent back to prison, potentially to remain there until the end of the supervised release term. The judge retains jurisdiction over a defendant's supervised release and will make decisions regarding early termination (for good behavior) or modification or revocation (for violations).
Supervised release differs from parole in several respects.
And what about probation? Similar to supervised release, a judge (rather than a separate board) makes decisions regarding probation. But unlike supervised release, which occurs after completion of a prison sentence, probation is served in lieu of a person's prison sentence. It's a chance for the offender to serve their sentence in the community while supervised and potentially avoid prison. If the probationer violates their conditions, a judge can revoke probation and send the offender to prison to start their sentence.
(18 U.S.C. § 3583 (2021).)
]]>This article discusses what parole means and how it generally works, but laws and procedures can vary from state to state.
Under parole as most people think of it—sometimes called "discretionary" parole—an inmate gets out of prison early and serves some part of the remaining sentence under parole supervision.
Under the traditional parole system, parole is a privilege for prisoners who seem capable of reintegrating into society. It’s not a right. Although some criminal statutes carry a right to an eventual parole hearing, typical laws don't absolutely guarantee parole itself. Authorities retain the discretion to deny parole to prisoners they deem dangerous. (Often, a parole board that denies parole to a prisoner sets another parole hearing at some later point, sometimes after several years.)
State law can provide that some kinds of convictions make prisoners ineligible for parole or eligible only after a very long prison sentence. Indeed, life without parole, regularly referred to as "LWOP," is a common alternative sentence to the death penalty.
Many prisoners do, however, become eligible for parole. Commonly, after a parole board finds that a prisoner is eligible, the inmate appears at a parole hearing. If granted parole, the parolee is released and lives free in society but under the continued supervision of the prison authority. (Parole decisions can involve multiple steps—for instance, review by a panel from the parole board and then review by the whole board. In a few states, the state governor gets to review the parole decision and might have the option to reverse at least some parole grants.)
Often, the prison authority primarily supervises the parolee through mandatory visits with a parole officer. State parole services (usually a branch of the department of corrections) may provide transitional services tailored to the parolee’s needs, such as shelter in a halfway house or intensive mental health counseling.
Once out on parole, a parolee enjoys the privilege of relative freedom in return for abiding by certain conditions. Some common parole conditions are that the parolee:
Under a typical parole system, the parolee is assigned a parole officer and must meet with that officer periodically. The parole officer may also make unannounced visits to the parolee’s home to check that the parolee is truly abiding by the relevant conditions. Unannounced visits let the officer observe whether, for example, there is evidence of parole violations like drug use.
To violate parole is to fail to live up to its conditions. The violation could be a bad act (like committing a new crime) or a failure to act (like not getting the parole officer's permission to leave the county or state before going out of town).
Violating parole by committing a crime can often land parolees back in prison or in jail. Some of the more minor or technical violations, such as prohibited alcohol use, could result in parole authorities imposing stricter or additional conditions rather than immediately commencing back-to-prison (revocation) proceedings. For instance, a parole officer might refer the parolee to substance abuse counseling (including, for example, AA meetings) and require proof of attendance. If the parolee fails to comply with the requirement, or if the parole violation was serious enough, the authorities may begin revocation proceedings.
At a typical hearing, the decision-maker, whether a judge, the parole board, or part of the parole board, will consider the nature and circumstances of the violation. (Parole violation proceedings can involve multiple steps, such as a hearing before a parole officer and then before the board itself.) The decision-maker determines whether to send the parolee back into custody. Depending on the rules of the jurisdiction, the prisoner may spend weeks, months, years, or the remainder of the original sentence back behind bars. The prisoner may also be granted a new parole hearing set to occur after serving some specified time.
Parole law varies by state. If you have questions about it or want to know how the law applies to you, consider speaking with a qualified lawyer. A knowledgeable lawyer will be able to more fully explain the law and procedures, including whether parole decisions are final. You may also find valuable information by searching for online resources. Some government and nonprofit websites provide helpful information.
]]>At any time before a term of supervised release or probation ends, a federal court may modify the original conditions. In deciding whether and how to modify, courts consider the same factors involved in the initial ordering of supervised release or probation. These factors include:
For probation modification, judges also consider:
Although judges consider the same factors they originally considered in setting the probation or supervised release term, they consider them at a different point in time. In that way, modification allows flexibility for circumstances that might change over time.
Early termination and extension of supervised release and probation are also possibilities when a judge reconsiders a defendant’s status.
Supervised Release. After considering the relevant modification factors (above), the court can discharge a defendant from supervised release—in other words, free the defendant from supervision. But the defendant must first complete one year of supervised release. Judges can’t discharge early when the supervised release is one year or less. And the court must find that the defendant’s conduct and the interest of justice warrant discharge.
Probation. The court can discharge a defendant from probation after one year in felony cases, and at any time for misdemeanor and infraction convictions.
On the other hand, a judge can extend supervised release or probation if circumstances warrant it. But the extended term can’t be longer than the maximum term that the judge could have originally ordered.
If, after a hearing, a judge finds that a defendant has violated a condition of probation or supervised release, the judge has options. The judge can continue the defendant on probation or supervised release, modifying or not modifying the conditions or the length of the probation or supervised release. The judge also has the option of revoking the probation or supervised release.
A judge who revokes probation can resentence the defendant to any sentence that was originally available for the defendant’s crime. For violations involving drug or firearm possession, refusing to take a drug test, or testing positive for drugs more than three times in a year, the judge must revoke probation or supervised release and sentence the defendant to prison. The federal sentencing guidelines also recommend that the judge revoke probation if the violation is based on a state or federal felony offense.
A judge who finds that an offender violated the terms of supervised release can send the defendant to prison for all or part of the maximum term that was originally available for supervised release. The defendant doesn’t get credit for the time she’s already spent on supervised released.
But the imprisonment can’t be longer than:
A judge who orders someone on supervised release back to prison can order another term of supervised release to follow the time in prison. But the supervised release term can’t exceed the maximum allowed for the defendant’s original offense. Here, the defendant’s time in prison counts toward the maximum term of supervised release.
If the government—state or federal—has charged you with a crime, consult a qualified attorney who practices in the relevant court system. An experienced lawyer can more fully advise you of the law and explain how it applies to your situation.
]]>