Eddie Phifer v. Board of Parole

Case Number
M2000-01509-COA-R3-CV
This is a pro se appeal from a denial of parole. Mr. Phifer alleges several problems surrounding his parole hearing that he claims violate his due process and equal protection rights and violate the ex post facto constitutional prohibition. Because a prisoner has no liberty interest in release on parole before the expiration of his sentence, due process protections do not attach to parole determinations. Because at the time of Mr. Phifer's crime and conviction, the law regarding parole gave total discretion to the Board and authorized denial if the Board found that parole would depreciate the seriousness of the crime committed, changes in Board procedure do not violate ex post facto prohibitions. Because the Board has provided a rational basis for denying in-person interviews for prisoners housed out of state, no equal protection violation was shown. Consequently, we affirm the trial court's dismissal of the petition for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
Authoring Judge
Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Originating Judge
Ellen Hobbs Lyle
Case Name
Eddie Phifer v. Board of Parole
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
No
Download PDF Version
PhiferE.pdf71.17 KB