Welcome to the Prison Talk Online Community! Take a Minute and Sign Up Today!






Go Back   Prison Talk > U.S. REGIONAL FORUMS > CALIFORNIA > CDCR - What You Need to Know
Register Entertainment FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

CDCR - What You Need to Know Information relating to the California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation. Q&A for those new to the CDCR system should be posted here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #976  
Old 10-22-2017, 08:40 PM
oshaye25 oshaye25 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: US
Posts: 233
Thanks: 21
Thanked 72 Times in 50 Posts
Default

What crimes are prop 57
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #977  
Old 10-22-2017, 08:44 PM
miamac's Avatar
miamac miamac is offline
Site Moderator Gone Mad

Staff Superstar Winner PTO Site Moderator 

 

Join Date: May 2013
Location: ORnativeAZresCAtied
Posts: 8,581
Thanks: 11,036
Thanked 14,870 Times in 5,644 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashbash100 View Post
Oh okay thank you for your response and as of now he's still in reception he hasn't even seen his counselor yet
He's getting way ahead of the game, then. And it's understandable, he wants to make this as quick and least disruptive to your family as possible. Unfortunately as a repeat offender, he's made some choices that have made that path a more difficult one. And it doesn't help that the rumor mill in reception is as bad, if not worse, than that on the yards. Staff and inmates alike can spread the craziest lines so it's always best to try to double and triple verify with outside sources.

Keep checking in here and let us know what the counselor says after he has his meeting. I do wish you the best of luck. Hang in there.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to miamac For This Useful Post:
Patrickj (10-22-2017)
  #978  
Old 10-22-2017, 08:45 PM
oshaye25 oshaye25 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: US
Posts: 233
Thanks: 21
Thanked 72 Times in 50 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrickj View Post
Isn't residential burglary still a violent crime? I haven't been beating the law books like I use to but I am still under the understanding that violent offenses do not qualify for prop 57. I understand he still can earn Milestone credits and other credits. A person convicted of a violent crime still does 80% of their sentence . The credits they earn only apply towards the 15% reduction. correct? Did I really miss something here with Prop.57?

80% of 10 years is 8 years minus county time and credits. Fill me in if I am wrong please. He will do 2-3 years before being considered for parole board hearing correct?


Okay my boyfriend parole date is November 2024 he is for robbery as well so wouldnít my dude date be 8 or 9 years as well. When I called his counselor she said he have to do 9 years and I speak to her last year. So how is it that if someone parole date at 2025 how can it be 8 years when my dude parole date is November 2024 I am lost. I am just asking thatís it
Reply With Quote
  #979  
Old 10-22-2017, 08:47 PM
missingdee's Avatar
missingdee missingdee is offline
She's Home! Moderator

PTO Moderator 

 

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Metro Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 2,747
Thanks: 3,068
Thanked 4,130 Times in 1,724 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oshaye25 View Post
Okay my boyfriend parole date is November 2024 he is for robbery as well so wouldnít my dude date be 8 or 9 years as well. When I called his counselor she said he have to do 9 years and I speak to her last year. So how is it that if someone parole date at 2025 how can it be 8 years when my dude parole date is November 2024 I am lost. I am just asking thatís it


He could have an in-prison charge, he could have write-ups, or the system could be wrong. Take your pick.
__________________
The Colorblind Moderator (I'm not even going to try to use green down here, I'll embarass myself! LOL!) Currently assisting in all forums and actively monitoring Wives and Girlfriends in Prison and the California forums.

#ByeCDCR #TimesUp #HomeForChristmas
Reply With Quote
  #980  
Old 10-22-2017, 08:51 PM
oshaye25 oshaye25 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: US
Posts: 233
Thanks: 21
Thanked 72 Times in 50 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by missingdee View Post
He could have an in-prison charge, he could have write-ups, or the system could be wrong. Take your pick.
No my boyfriend donít have no prison charge he would of told me. He havenít had a write up either. But I was just asking thatís it. I just know when I spoke to his counselor she told me that he have to do 9 years in prison it just not making sense. And I havenít heard from my boyfriend so I canít ask and on top of that his mom is sick.
Reply With Quote
  #981  
Old 10-22-2017, 10:13 PM
Patrickj's Avatar
Patrickj Patrickj is offline
Moderator

PTO Moderator 

 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atwater CA. USA.
Posts: 2,362
Thanks: 1,623
Thanked 1,725 Times in 833 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oshaye25 View Post
Okay my boyfriend parole date is November 2024 he is for robbery as well so wouldnít my dude date be 8 or 9 years as well. When I called his counselor she said he have to do 9 years and I speak to her last year. So how is it that if someone parole date at 2025 how can it be 8 years when my dude parole date is November 2024 I am lost. I am just asking thatís it

First thing that needs to be determined is his full sentence with enhancements. If his total term is 10 years @ 80% he would do close to 8 years for a 80% total. If he has more then 10 years the amount of time will increase.
__________________
Be a friend to everyone,never know when you may need their help
Reply With Quote
  #982  
Old 10-22-2017, 11:38 PM
Ashbash100's Avatar
Ashbash100 Ashbash100 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: United States ca
Posts: 15
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miamac View Post
He's getting way ahead of the game, then. And it's understandable, he wants to make this as quick and least disruptive to your family as possible. Unfortunately as a repeat offender, he's made some choices that have made that path a more difficult one. And it doesn't help that the rumor mill in reception is as bad, if not worse, than that on the yards. Staff and inmates alike can spread the craziest lines so it's always best to try to double and triple verify with outside sources.

Keep checking in here and let us know what the counselor says after he has his meeting. I do wish you the best of luck. Hang in there.
Okay thank you so much and I will definetly keep y'all updated because I'm going to be needing a lot of questions answered over time lol , but he also mentioned something called main line and only doing 60% what is that ? Lol sorry this is his first time in prison so I'm new to all of this . Ugh I don't know how I'm going to get through the next few years if it's only been a few months and I can't wait already I'm depressed all the time about it . My daughter is 5 and my son is only 1 years old ....
Reply With Quote
  #983  
Old 10-22-2017, 11:39 PM
missingdee's Avatar
missingdee missingdee is offline
She's Home! Moderator

PTO Moderator 

 

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Metro Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 2,747
Thanks: 3,068
Thanked 4,130 Times in 1,724 Posts
Default Prop 57, Part III, Regulation Implementation (California)

There is no 60% under Prop 57.
__________________
The Colorblind Moderator (I'm not even going to try to use green down here, I'll embarass myself! LOL!) Currently assisting in all forums and actively monitoring Wives and Girlfriends in Prison and the California forums.

#ByeCDCR #TimesUp #HomeForChristmas

Last edited by missingdee; 10-22-2017 at 11:39 PM.. Reason: 57 not 47
Reply With Quote
  #984  
Old 10-23-2017, 12:12 AM
miamac's Avatar
miamac miamac is offline
Site Moderator Gone Mad

Staff Superstar Winner PTO Site Moderator 

 

Join Date: May 2013
Location: ORnativeAZresCAtied
Posts: 8,581
Thanks: 11,036
Thanked 14,870 Times in 5,644 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashbash100 View Post
Okay thank you so much and I will definetly keep y'all updated because I'm going to be needing a lot of questions answered over time lol , but he also mentioned something called main line and only doing 60% what is that ? Lol sorry this is his first time in prison so I'm new to all of this . Ugh I don't know how I'm going to get through the next few years if it's only been a few months and I can't wait already I'm depressed all the time about it . My daughter is 5 and my son is only 1 years old ....
Mainline just means they've been put on a regular yard (not reception, SHU, ect). Some people use mainline to mean general population and not protective custody. But typically it just means a regular yard. It doesn't have any affect on the percentage you serve.

As missingdee said, there is no 60% level. There is a 66% but it's for non-violent offenders in fire camp and some min custody inmates.

He's going to hear a lot of theories on how to reduce his time. Usually he's getting it from someone who heard it from someone who heard it fro-- see where I'm going? lol Unless they have it writing, they can point to it in Title 15 (prison regulation bible) or you can find it online from CDCR, it's just a rumor.
Reply With Quote
  #985  
Old 11-11-2017, 11:01 AM
Marie_blank Marie_blank is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: California
Posts: 22
Thanks: 13
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

My loved one is a violent offender and he maxed out his eprd due to write ups. He hasn’t gotten the 5% credit so he inquired about it and he told me he was told due to maxing out his time he’s not eligible for the 5%. Has anyone else heard this because my understanding was that this credit is from May 1 and on. He maxed out in 2016 and hasn’t gotten in any trouble since
Reply With Quote
  #986  
Old 11-11-2017, 12:08 PM
missingdee's Avatar
missingdee missingdee is offline
She's Home! Moderator

PTO Moderator 

 

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Metro Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 2,747
Thanks: 3,068
Thanked 4,130 Times in 1,724 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marie_blank View Post
My loved one is a violent offender and he maxed out his eprd due to write ups. He hasnít gotten the 5% credit so he inquired about it and he told me he was told due to maxing out his time heís not eligible for the 5%. Has anyone else heard this because my understanding was that this credit is from May 1 and on. He maxed out in 2016 and hasnít gotten in any trouble since
It could be that the added time from his write-ups exceed the 5% he would have otherwise gained through Prop 57. Depending on how many days he's had taken beyond his max date (they don't actually hold him longer but it does count against potential gains from milestones and such) he might not get time off for milestones, either.

Dee technically owed about 3 years of time when she was released due to write-ups (won't get into how or whether that was really justified.) The only good news is, when she came out the gate, that time no longer applied to anything if I read Title 15 correctly.

His best bet is to make sure that he doesn't pick up new charges. As long as he doesn't, even if he gets more write-ups, he will release on his max-out date.

-E
__________________
The Colorblind Moderator (I'm not even going to try to use green down here, I'll embarass myself! LOL!) Currently assisting in all forums and actively monitoring Wives and Girlfriends in Prison and the California forums.

#ByeCDCR #TimesUp #HomeForChristmas
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to missingdee For This Useful Post:
Marie_blank (11-11-2017), Patrickj (11-11-2017)
  #987  
Old 11-11-2017, 04:32 PM
marie8899 marie8899 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: California, U.S.A.
Posts: 937
Thanks: 3,437
Thanked 1,005 Times in 473 Posts
Default

Sorry to have to ask this, but I lost track of what we are waiting for. If my l.o. earns milestone credits (which he should be eligible for), are they automatically going to be counted soon under Prop 57 or are we waiting for something from CDCR? I have read about the so-called waiting period, but I'm not sure exactly what it means or when it will end (if ever). By "automatically", I mean will he get a notice amending his discharge date? He has no writeups and has been in a voc program for about a year and a half. I did see his amended discharge date on the CDCR site after they changed the 85% to 80%. But knowing milestone credits is very important at this point. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #988  
Old 11-11-2017, 07:04 PM
miamac's Avatar
miamac miamac is offline
Site Moderator Gone Mad

Staff Superstar Winner PTO Site Moderator 

 

Join Date: May 2013
Location: ORnativeAZresCAtied
Posts: 8,581
Thanks: 11,036
Thanked 14,870 Times in 5,644 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by marie8899 View Post
Sorry to have to ask this, but I lost track of what we are waiting for. If my l.o. earns milestone credits (which he should be eligible for), are they automatically going to be counted soon under Prop 57 or are we waiting for something from CDCR? I have read about the so-called waiting period, but I'm not sure exactly what it means or when it will end (if ever).
Any milestones he has earned after the Aug 1 date will be calculated into his time and show at his annual committee. Some counselors are notifying inmates of credits as they are earned, on a rolling basis if you will, but not all. But for sure at the time of his annual all earned credits from Aug 1 forward should be reflected in his calculation.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to miamac For This Useful Post:
marie8899 (11-15-2017)
  #989  
Old 11-15-2017, 12:11 PM
Luv0fHisLife's Avatar
Luv0fHisLife Luv0fHisLife is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Beautiful So. Cal
Posts: 4,337
Thanks: 1,280
Thanked 875 Times in 654 Posts
Default

Hello,

I'm sorry if I'm posting this in the wrong thread. (Move if needed) I have a question.
My husband called me last night saying that he got a letter saying that today, he would be getting an approved visit from a Parole Board Lawyer. Does anyone know why he would be visiting him? He's not due for release for another 2-3 years. I mean is that a good sign of him possibly coming home sooner? He did recently file with the courts for re-sentencing.

Thank you in advance.
__________________
Somos Dos Almas
Que Estan
Firmemente Enamorados

Reply With Quote
  #990  
Old 11-15-2017, 02:45 PM
missingdee's Avatar
missingdee missingdee is offline
She's Home! Moderator

PTO Moderator 

 

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Metro Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 2,747
Thanks: 3,068
Thanked 4,130 Times in 1,724 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luv0fHisLife View Post
Hello,

I'm sorry if I'm posting this in the wrong thread. (Move if needed) I have a question.
My husband called me last night saying that he got a letter saying that today, he would be getting an approved visit from a Parole Board Lawyer. Does anyone know why he would be visiting him? He's not due for release for another 2-3 years. I mean is that a good sign of him possibly coming home sooner? He did recently file with the courts for re-sentencing.

Thank you in advance.
Resentencing wouldn't involve the parole board so unless they classified the attorney wrong I'm doubting it would have anything to do with it.

Why did he apply for resentencing? What were the grounds? If it has to do with a gun enhancement, note two things. 1.) a judge is not obligated to resentence based on a gun enhancement, and 2.) a judge can impose a HIGHER sentence than they originally pronounced during a resentencing hearing. If he plead out, he throws away the benefit of the plea bargain in the process and is literally at the mercy of the court (and the court doesn't have to show mercy.)

Without knowing what his charges are, it'd be impossible to say if the lawyer has anything to do with Prop 57. Frankly, we'd need more information to even wager a guess at what's going on. If you have a little more background information available that might be useful. However, as there is a chance that this is Prop 57 related (the part about parole makes it potentially relevant,) I think this may be the best thread for the question, at least for now. If more information makes it clear that there's something else going on we can always move the posts on this topic if necessary later.
__________________
The Colorblind Moderator (I'm not even going to try to use green down here, I'll embarass myself! LOL!) Currently assisting in all forums and actively monitoring Wives and Girlfriends in Prison and the California forums.

#ByeCDCR #TimesUp #HomeForChristmas
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to missingdee For This Useful Post:
marie8899 (11-20-2017), Patrickj (11-15-2017)
  #991  
Old 11-15-2017, 05:34 PM
Patrickj's Avatar
Patrickj Patrickj is offline
Moderator

PTO Moderator 

 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atwater CA. USA.
Posts: 2,362
Thanks: 1,623
Thanked 1,725 Times in 833 Posts
Default

The changes to the sections on gun enhancements that were changed by SB620.Do not go in to effect into Jan. 2018. Don't see where this would even come in to play for this attorney visit. Like it was said with the limited information being given by the OP. I am not going to try and read any tea leaves on why this attorney is coming to see the inmates.
Since the OP did say the inmate did file for resentencing. This could be the attorney representing him on this subject There is a error on the duct On the other hand the inmate should have received some type of information from his attorney introducing her/himself , That they are the attorney on record for this matter.
__________________
Be a friend to everyone,never know when you may need their help
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Patrickj For This Useful Post:
missingdee (11-15-2017)
  #992  
Old 11-24-2017, 05:38 PM
ChocoholicMom ChocoholicMom is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: CA, USA
Posts: 538
Thanks: 277
Thanked 575 Times in 238 Posts
Default

Hi my husband just recently was denied parole through non violent parole review under prop 57. The reasoning was becuase of his current crime and his past criminal history. Since being incarcerated since 2013, he has taken numerous courses and recieved milestone for 10 different course. However, although it is written that way, it appears to have no significant factor in determining eligibility. The commissioner felt his crime of residential burgarly was a factor that deemed him not suitable. Although he has been to prison once prior in 1996 and released in 2003, federal prison. This was his first state bid. He had 2 arrest 1996 and 2006 for possession of marijuana which fall under prop 47, those were considered. So it appears that no matter how an inmate avoid trouble and programs correctly, they will find a way to deny. Determining eligibility seems to be heavily weighed on his past. As well all know we cant change our past amd cdcr is aware of an inmates past when they deem them eligble. It appears to be a way to pacify the voters into thinking prop 57 will release inmates but in actuality they won't.

The comminsoner also lied stating he read the transcripts and the witness stated he saw my husband coming out of the garage. Untrue I have the transcripts and was in court the witness said he could not identify my husband as he had never seen him before. So they also are interpreting and re-trying inmates..unfair.

I'm looking into what can be done and how this can be brought to someone attention.law makers need to know, board of parole is not releasing inmates under prop 57 and instead finding ways to keep them incarcerated. They are still keeping California inmate out of state, which allows the number to look as though they are decreased.
__________________



Last edited by Patrickj; 11-24-2017 at 06:22 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #993  
Old 11-24-2017, 06:22 PM
missingdee's Avatar
missingdee missingdee is offline
She's Home! Moderator

PTO Moderator 

 

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Metro Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 2,747
Thanks: 3,068
Thanked 4,130 Times in 1,724 Posts
Default Prop 57, Part III, Regulation Implementation (California)

Residential burglary of an occupied dwelling is considered a violent offense. If that is the current crime that he is doing time for, then that is why he didnít get NVO parole.

They have to look at the nature of the crime. It is not the commissionerís responsibility to change what he was convicted for.

So if his current crime is burglary of an occupied dwelling, he does not qualify for 57. It isnít an issue of a lie. Itís an issue of what he was actually charged with. They arenít re-trying the case. Under the law, the denial is legitimate. He doesnít qualify.

http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/parole/non_re...s_defined.html

If the home owner stated that they saw the perp go out the garage and he was convicted of the crime, that is all the evidence that they need to make the crime violent as it implies the home owner was in the house at some point during the commission of the crime, per line 21 of Penal Code 667.5(c)
__________________
The Colorblind Moderator (I'm not even going to try to use green down here, I'll embarass myself! LOL!) Currently assisting in all forums and actively monitoring Wives and Girlfriends in Prison and the California forums.

#ByeCDCR #TimesUp #HomeForChristmas
Reply With Quote
  #994  
Old 11-24-2017, 06:38 PM
Patrickj's Avatar
Patrickj Patrickj is offline
Moderator

PTO Moderator 

 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atwater CA. USA.
Posts: 2,362
Thanks: 1,623
Thanked 1,725 Times in 833 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocoholicMom View Post
Hi my husband just recently was denied parole through non violent parole review under prop 57. The reasoning was becuase of his current crime and his past criminal history. Since being incarcerated since 2013, he has taken numerous courses and recieved milestone for 10 different course. However, although it is written that way, it appears to have no significant factor in determining eligibility. The commissioner felt his crime of residential burgarly was a factor that deemed him not suitable. Although he has been to prison once prior in 1996 and released in 2003, federal prison. This was his first state bid. He had 2 arrest 1996 and 2006 for possession of marijuana which fall under prop 47, those were considered. So it appears that no matter how an inmate avoid trouble and programs correctly, they will find a way to deny. Determining eligibility seems to be heavily weighed on his past. As well all know we cant change our past amd cdcr is aware of an inmates past when they deem them eligble. It appears to be a way to pacify the voters into thinking prop 57 will release inmates but in actuality they won't.

The comminsoner also lied stating he read the transcripts and the witness stated he saw my husband coming out of the garage. Untrue I have the transcripts and was in court the witness said he could not identify my husband as he had never seen him before. So they also are interpreting and re-trying inmates..unfair.

I'm looking into what can be done and how this can be brought to someone attention.law makers need to know, board of parole is not releasing inmates under prop 57 and instead finding ways to keep them incarcerated. They are still keeping California inmate out of state, which allows the number to look as though they are decreased.

You pointed one of the many reasons I do not like Prop.57. Going in front of a Parole Board. All that Parole Boards do is hash and re-hash your past. I have always been one for determinate sentences, but not with all of these enhancements on enhancements The more we see how Prop.57 will be handled by the Parole Board the more we will see that it is not the way to help in over crowding. I also do not like all of the uncontrolled authority that CDCR has received under Prop.57. on the way they have readjusted the credit earning for people convicted of first degree murder and other offenses where the California Penal Code, has already defined what percentages of good time these offenses could earn. CDCR has been allowed to over write law with administrative policy and procedure. Which I think is pure B.S. CDCR is a agency of the State of California not the California, Legislators. Now we have a state agency writing policy and procedure that over rides state law. Anyone else here see a problem with this now and in the future ?
__________________
Be a friend to everyone,never know when you may need their help
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Patrickj For This Useful Post:
miamac (11-24-2017), missingdee (11-24-2017)
  #995  
Old 11-24-2017, 07:20 PM
miamac's Avatar
miamac miamac is offline
Site Moderator Gone Mad

Staff Superstar Winner PTO Site Moderator 

 

Join Date: May 2013
Location: ORnativeAZresCAtied
Posts: 8,581
Thanks: 11,036
Thanked 14,870 Times in 5,644 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocoholicMom View Post
Hi my husband just recently was denied parole through non violent parole review under prop 57. The reasoning was becuase of his current crime and his past criminal history.
For clarificationís sake and that it may help others in a similar position:
Was he charged with burglary of an occupied dwelling?
Do you know the penal codes for his current charges?
Non Violent Offenders have reviews, a paperwork only process. Violent Offenders have parole hearings in front of the board.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocoholicMom View Post
So it appears that no matter how an inmate avoid trouble and programs correctly, they will find a way to deny. Determining eligibility seems to be heavily weighed on his past. As well all know we cant change our past amd cdcr is aware of an inmates past when they deem them eligble. It appears to be a way to pacify the voters into thinking prop 57 will release inmates but in actuality they won't.
Prop 57 was not a gate buster. People took it as a promise when what in reality it was an opportunity. The premise of 57 was that an inmate driven toward rehabilitation could be incentivized with additional time off and/or earlier review and hearing processes.

What Prop 57 did NOT change:
a)Consideration of past criminal history/habitual offender status
b)Disciplinary actions inside of prison (when was their last write-up? how many before that? what for?)
c)The requirement that an inmate adequately be able to demonstrate insight into their criminal past and how they intend to function differently in the future if released.

No one can change the facts of their past (a) but they can work (b) and (c) to a level that mitigate whatever past behavior they may have had. Going to classes and groups is great, but thatís only part of it. They need to be able to show/verbalize to the Board that they can do differently. Board wants to see/hear a solid plan. Too many people fall back on certificates as proof. But thatís not enough.

In reality, 57 was blown way out of proportion by voters in the ways it would favor inmates and chose to downplay the weight of transferring power to CDCR/BPH would have. Donít like it? Thatís what a Ďyesí vote was for.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to miamac For This Useful Post:
missingdee (11-25-2017), Patrickj (11-24-2017)
  #996  
Old 11-25-2017, 10:59 AM
ChocoholicMom ChocoholicMom is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: CA, USA
Posts: 538
Thanks: 277
Thanked 575 Times in 238 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by missingdee View Post
Residential burglary of an occupied dwelling is considered a violent offense. If that is the current crime that he is doing time for, then that is why he didnít get NVO parole.

They have to look at the nature of the crime. It is not the commissionerís responsibility to change what he was convicted for.

So if his current crime is burglary of an occupied dwelling, he does not qualify for 57. It isnít an issue of a lie. Itís an issue of what he was actually charged with. They arenít re-trying the case. Under the law, the denial is legitimate. He doesnít qualify.

http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/parole/non_re...s_defined.html

If the home owner stated that they saw the perp go out the garage and he was convicted of the crime, that is all the evidence that they need to make the crime violent as it implies the home owner was in the house at some point during the commission of the crime, per line 21 of Penal Code 667.5(c)

He was convicted of residential burgarly, non occupied, no victims and no property damage or items taken. That's obviously how he was even eligible to be considered. The crime is not violent or again an inmate would not even be considered and would not recieve a letter stating they are in review.

Again, no witness stated they saw my husband coming out of a garage and that was the lie I spoke of. As I previosuly stated I was in court and have the transcripts. The home owner was never there. By point if the post was to inform other that it appears no matter what institutional behavior their lo has, parole board is not deciding in their favor
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #997  
Old 11-25-2017, 11:06 AM
ChocoholicMom ChocoholicMom is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: CA, USA
Posts: 538
Thanks: 277
Thanked 575 Times in 238 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miamac View Post
For clarificationís sake and that it may help others in a similar position:
Was he charged with burglary of an occupied dwelling?
Do you know the penal codes for his current charges?
Non Violent Offenders have reviews, a paperwork only process. Violent Offenders have parole hearings in front of the board.


Prop 57 was not a gate buster. People took it as a promise when what in reality it was an opportunity. The premise of 57 was that an inmate driven toward rehabilitation could be incentivized with additional time off and/or earlier review and hearing processes.

What Prop 57 did NOT change:
a)Consideration of past criminal history/habitual offender status
b)Disciplinary actions inside of prison (when was their last write-up? how many before that? what for?)
c)The requirement that an inmate adequately be able to demonstrate insight into their criminal past and how they intend to function differently in the future if released.

No one can change the facts of their past (a) but they can work (b) and (c) to a level that mitigate whatever past behavior they may have had. Going to classes and groups is great, but thatís only part of it. They need to be able to show/verbalize to the Board that they can do differently. Board wants to see/hear a solid plan. Too many people fall back on certificates as proof. But thatís not enough.

In reality, 57 was blown way out of proportion by voters in the ways it would favor inmates and chose to downplay the weight of transferring power to CDCR/BPH would have. Donít like it? Thatís what a Ďyesí vote was for.
Convicted of residential burgarly 459, and gang enhancement/street terrisom, recieivng a total of 18 years. The primary offense was only 4 years but the gang enhancement and other alternative sentencing doubled it. No one was home at the time. We never thought prop 57 would be a gate opener, but an opportunity for those who were sentenced unfairly would be able to recieve a fair possibility of parole. As I stated, my husband utilized all that cdcr has had to offer as far as programs, he has gained a significant amount of milestone credits, taken course and training. So it is obvious that institution behavior does not and will not have an affect on an inmates parole being granted or denied ubder prop 57. We have a plan and informed cdcr of this, we submitted documents, as my husband was offered several jobs upon his release, i enrolled him in numerous programs upon his release. I work for la county and there are lots of programs that work with ex felons I submitted those as well. And still it didn't matter.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #998  
Old 11-25-2017, 11:11 AM
ChocoholicMom ChocoholicMom is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: CA, USA
Posts: 538
Thanks: 277
Thanked 575 Times in 238 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrickj View Post

You pointed one of the many reasons I do not like Prop.57. Going in front of a Parole Board. All that Parole Boards do is hash and re-hash your past. I have always been one for determinate sentences, but not with all of these enhancements on enhancements The more we see how Prop.57 will be handled by the Parole Board the more we will see that it is not the way to help in over crowding. I also do not like all of the uncontrolled authority that CDCR has received under Prop.57. on the way they have readjusted the credit earning for people convicted of first degree murder and other offenses where the California Penal Code, has already defined what percentages of good time these offenses could earn. CDCR has been allowed to over write law with administrative policy and procedure. Which I think is pure B.S. CDCR is a agency of the State of California not the California, Legislators. Now we have a state agency writing policy and procedure that over rides state law. Anyone else here see a problem with this now and in the future ?
Exactly, parole board, the media and whoever else has made the people think that prop 57 would afford inmates a chance at being considered for release at the original sentence, when in fact that is not true. It appears it doesn't matter what they're current conduct is, they are being denied. Prop 57 was voted to pass due to overwhelmingly amount of cases that recieved sentences that were just unfair, due to enhancements. To take a sentence of 4 years and add on 14 more us ridiculous. The commissioner brought up my husband marijuana cases from 1996 and 2006 but failed to recognize the fact that the state is now saying those convictions fall under misdemeanor. But well continue to fight and see what happens next year when he is up for review again.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #999  
Old 11-25-2017, 11:18 AM
ChocoholicMom ChocoholicMom is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: CA, USA
Posts: 538
Thanks: 277
Thanked 575 Times in 238 Posts
Default

Fyi, for those who know the courts and the system. My husband is a black man and was convicted in Orange county, ca. Anyone who understands that will understand it didnt matter if i brought johnnie cochran back from the dead, they were going to convict him anyway. The entire justice system is screwed up becuase there is no way a case from 1996 should have been used against my husband to give 5 years for a prior felony. He was convicted in part becuase he refused a plea deal which his co-defendants took, so of course your sentenced harsher. How can you add gang enhancement when hes mot in gang file or habe a gang record? I know there are some who feel they have legal expertise but not everything is black and white and just because it's written as legal doesn't mean it's right. Hell slavery was legal didn't make it right.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #1000  
Old 11-25-2017, 11:25 AM
miamac's Avatar
miamac miamac is offline
Site Moderator Gone Mad

Staff Superstar Winner PTO Site Moderator 

 

Join Date: May 2013
Location: ORnativeAZresCAtied
Posts: 8,581
Thanks: 11,036
Thanked 14,870 Times in 5,644 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocoholicMom View Post
Convicted of residential burgarly 459, and gang enhancement/street terrisom, recieivng a total of 18 years. The primary offense was only 4 years but the gang enhancement and other alternative sentencing doubled it. No one was home at the time. We never thought prop 57 would be a gate
I understand you're frustrated that they focused on his past criminal history. It would upset me, too, if they misconstrued the facts of his crime and that I would try to pursue (though I'm not sure what avenues are available and would be interested to know).

He's served four years of an 18 year sentence. Yes, Prop 57 offers them the opportunity for a review at the completion of the primary offense but they still consider the whole term.

California is and always will be harsh when it comes to gang involvement. No need to answer this, but did he stay active in prison? Did he drop out? Did he attend Anti-violence and CGA courses? Did he address in his personal statements to the Board how he intended to avoid and actively distance himself from gang life?

I know you're upset, I encourage you to pursue the error in trial facts, but I can tell you that as far as program participation goes into consideration-- yes, it does matter, however, up until this last year, participation was defined as 1 day of attendance in a program regardless of total program length. The Board knows this. They're not blind to the reality of how facilities have run half-@ss groups and programs. That's why it's imperative that our loved ones write-out, seek mentorship on, get feedback on how to speak (or write) to the Board so they are actively demonstrating rehabilitation.

I can't say this enough. It is not sufficient to sit in a class or group. The standards changed when they lowered GCC and offered NVO reviews. Encourage your LOs to go above and beyond. Participate in non-credit earning programs. Take leadership roles. Seek chronos from staff members for their file based on behaviour. Build an unbreakable personal statement regarding your own rehabilitation. Know the 12 Steps backward and forward even if you never had substance abuse problem, take those steps and apply them to gang life or criminal mentality. When you think you've done enough, do some more.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Prop 57, Part II, Post Proposition Passing Info miamac California Legal Help 457 03-24-2017 02:55 PM
Prop 57, Part I, “The Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016” Monique83 California General Prison Talk 11 01-23-2017 01:29 PM
Implementation of Inmate Credit Earning Program at California out of state correction Shari California General Prison Talk 5 09-29-2010 10:57 PM
Part of Prop 9 Overturned regarding parolees linda5280 California Parole, Probation & Release 0 03-28-2009 07:16 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:58 AM.
Copyright © 2001- 2017 Prison Talk Online
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Website Design & Custom vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media
Message Board Statistics