James Edward Bowles v. Paula Tennant, Commissioner, United States Parole Commission, United States Bureau of Prisons

Good Law
613 F.2d 776·1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 20398
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 19, 198079-2553California1,091 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hug, J.

James Edward Bowles was convicted in federal court of interstate transportation of stolen property in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314 and was sentenced to a prison term of eight years. He brought this federal habeas action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 , alleging that the procedures through which the United States Parole Commission denied him parole violate due process. Bowles appeals from the district court’s order denying his habeas petition. We affirm.

An initial parole hearing for Bowles was held approximately three months after he began serving his federal sentence. After the hearing, the Parole Commission denied Bowles early parole and continued his case for further review at a later date. Soon after the hearing, the Commission issued a “notice of action,” which informed Bowles that the severity of his offense had been rated as “greatest” because of the connection of his offense to violent robberies. After exhausting administrative remedies, Bowles brought this habeas action.

On appeal, Bowles argues that (1) the procedure used by the Commission is subject to judicial review for violations of due process, and (2) the Commission violated due process in this case by failing to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.