Paul F. Jancsek, III v. Oregon Board of Parole

Good Law
833 F.2d 1389·1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 16193
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 11, 198787-3614California886 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hug, J.

Paul F. Jancsek appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Jancsek is currently serving a life sentence for the murder of his wife. The Oregon Board of Parole set Jancsek’s release date outside the range guidelines because it found aggravating circumstances. Jancsek claims he was denied due process because, in finding aggravation, the parole board considered information that was unsupported by the record. We affirm the district court’s decision.

DISCUSSION

We review the district court’s denial of Jancsek’s petition for habeas corpus de novo. Jones v. United States, 783 F.2d 1477, 1479 (9th Cir.1986). We need not decide the threshold issue of whether the Oregon parole statute confers a liberty interest entitling prisoners to due process protection in the setting of release dates. See, e.g., Pedro v. Oregon Parole Board, 825 F.2d 1396, 1398 (9th Cir.1987). Instead, we assume for the purposes of this decision that prisoners have such a liberty interest, but we conclude that Jancsek was afforded all the due process protection that is required.

In Greenholtz v. Nebraska Penal Inmates, 442 U.S. 1, 12 , 99 S.Ct. 2100, 2106 , 60 L.Ed.2d 668 (1979),…

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.