United States Second Circuit

In a class action suit against the Governor of New York and others, claiming that they have been denied parole as a result of an "unwritten policy" to deny parole to violent felony offenders, and that this unofficial policy violates the federal constitution, district court's grant of defendants' motion to dismiss is affirmed where: 1) because the New York parole scheme is not one that creates a legitimate expectancy of release, prisoners have no liberty interest in parole, and the protections of the Due Process Clause are inapplicable; 2) even if plaintiffs are able to state a valid claim in New York courts under New York State law, they have failed to state a claim under the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution; 3) plaintiffs have failed to state an equal protection claim as the rational basis for a distinction in parole determinations between violent and nonviolent offenders is self-evident; and 4) plaintiffs' ex post facto argument is foreclosed by the holding in Barna, which held that the Ex Post Facto Clause does not apply to guidelines that do not create mandatory rules for release but are promulgated simply to guide the parole board in the exercise of its discretion.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/03/2012
• Published 08/03/2012

Judges

Court

• United States Second Circuit

Counsel