Category: Probation and Parole

Double Murderer Released Early, Convicted of New Murder

by · Mar 23, 2026 11:45 am

The Los Angeles District Attorney has this press release on the case of previously convicted double murderer who has now been convicted of a third murder. If the laws in effect at the time of the first judgment had been enforced, the third murder victim would likely be alive.

On Sept. 17, 1995, 28-year-old Derrick Reese was using a payphone when Collins carjacked him. After taking the vehicle, Collins backed up and shot Reese at least twice, killing him.

On Sept. 28, 1995, Collins entered a diner in Inglewood where 44-year-old Thomas Weiss was working as a cashier. Collins held Weiss at gunpoint and demanded money. When Weiss did not comply, Collins shot him in the face, killing him.

Both victims were random strangers, murdered 11 days apart. On January 15, 1998, Collins was sentenced to 50 years to life imprisonment.

Both the multiple murder and robbery-murder special circumstances are obviously true, so Collins could have gotten death or life without parole for these killings, but 50-to-life would have seemed sufficient at the time to ensure that Collins would not get out until he was quite elderly, if at all. Yet Collins was released in 2020. Why? Continue reading . . .

Serial Child Rapist Released from Prison, Back in Jail

by · Feb 27, 2026 9:37 am

Notorious California sexual predator David Funston (see this post) was released on parole yesterday under the state’s misguided “elderly” parole law and promptly taken into custody on new charges for an old crime. He is now in Placer County Jail. See this story by Darrell Smith in the Sacramento Bee and this story by Stepheny Price at Fox News.

Funston committed his crimes in an area northeast of Sacramento that includes parts of Sacramento and Placer Counties. After he received three consecutive life sentences in the Sacramento case, the Placer County District Attorney decided not to pursue the case in that county. The District Attorney Office’s statement is copied below.

This prompt action may prevent the unjust release of a predator in this case, but the case illustrates the urgent need for the California Legislature to repair its errors committed over the last decade. The prison overcrowding crisis and the Covid pandemic are long behind us, and measures adopted to deal with them should have had sunset dates. Basic justice requires long terms for the most egregious crimes. Some criminals, including Funston, should never walk free again.

Continue reading . . .

“Monster” Child Sexual Predator Granted Early Parole

by · Feb 22, 2026 6:58 pm

The Los Angeles Times has this story by Clara Harter:

A Sacramento man once described by a judge as “the monster parents fear the most” seemed destined to spend the rest of his life in prison after he was convicted of 16 counts of kidnapping and child molestation in 1999.

Instead, he is now set to go free after being granted elderly parole — much to the anger and horror of some of his victims, as well as the prosecutor who oversaw his case.

“He shouldn’t be breathing the same air that we’re breathing at all,” one victim, who was kidnapped and assaulted when she was just 4 years old, told The Times in an interview. “I disagree with him getting paroled out because he’s a horrible person. That man is a monster.” Continue reading . . .

California’s “Elderly” Parole Law

by · Feb 9, 2026 10:16 am

CJLF CEO Anne Marie Schubert has this op-ed in the Sacramento Bee on California’ “elderly” parole law.

The law absurdly defines “elderly” as over 50, and it permits parole after 20 years regardless of the minimum term specified in the sentence or in the law under which the inmate was sentenced.

California’s elderly parole law is the most lenient in the nation. While 24 other states have similar programs, most automatically exclude murderers and sex offenders. California does not. Continue reading . . .

Evading Accountability for Injustice

by · Jan 27, 2026 2:55 am

In most states, the power to grant a pardon or commute a sentence is vested in the governor, sometimes with a check on the power by another body. Parole boards can also shorten sentences, but in most states the members are appointed by the governor. Although far from perfect, these conventional arrangements do provide some semblance of accountability for unjust, undeserved reductions of punishment for major crimes. Even when not running for reelection, governors often have their eyes on another office and tend to be reluctant to anger voters with excessive sentence reductions.

Now in Virginia there is a bill to take the heat off the governor by greatly expanding the parole board and vesting appointment authority for the new seats in two legislators: the Speaker of the House of Delegates and the chairman of the Senate Rules Committee. These office holders directly face the voters of only their own districts, often “safe” ones, and they can be much less concerned with angering the voters of the state as a whole.

This post at Liberty Unyielding denounces the proposal. It is reproduced below with permission. Continue reading . . .

Virginia legislation could release dangerous murderers and tie the hands of the parole board

by · Dec 11, 2025 2:09 pm

In the wake of the November election, with the governor’s veto threat removed, the Virginia legislature is proceeding to pass California-style legislation that takes soft-on-crime to new levels. Hans Bader has this post with the above title at Liberty Unyielding.

In a nutshell, the bill would make the crime that a prison inmate committed irrelevant to the parole decision for those inmates who were under 18 at the time they committed major felonies. Continue reading . . .

Supreme Court November Arguments

by · Nov 3, 2025 11:32 am

The U.S. Supreme Court’s November argument calendar begins today. It is Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday this week and next except for Veterans’ Day, next Tuesday.

Here are the criminal and law-enforcement-related civil cases on the docket:

Today, Nov. 3: Rico v. United States.  Whether the fugitive-tolling doctrine applies in the context of supervised release.

Next Monday, Nov. 10: Landor v. La. Dept. Corrections:  Whether an individual may sue a government official in his individual capacity for damages for violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000.

Next Wednesday, Nov. 12: Fernandez v. United States:  Whether a combination of “extraordinary and compelling reasons” that may warrant a discretionary sentence reduction under 18 U. S. C. §3582(c)(1)(a) can include reasons that may also be alleged as grounds for vacatur of a sentence under 28 U. S. C. §2255.

Next Wednesday, Nov. 12: Rutherford v. United States and Carter v. United States:  Nonretroactive changes in sentencing law as grounds for sentence reduction. Continue reading . . .

Judge Resentences Menendez Brothers

by · Oct 22, 2025 11:29 am

A Los Angeles judge has resentenced the Menendez brothers, originally serving life without parole, to 50-years-to-life.  ABC News reports that the brothers, who murdered their parents with shotguns in 1989,  are immediately eligible for parole.  Later in the story reporter Emily Shapiro writes,

“It could take months before Erik and Lyle Menendez are assigned a parole date for the resentencing case. They are eligible for that parole date right away, as inmates with a sentence of 25 years-to-life or longer can get their hearing during the 25th year of incarceration, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.”

The 25-year eligibility comes under California’s “youth offender parole” statute. It was originally enacted for inmates under 18 at the time of the crime to address problems created by U.S. Supreme Court decisions. However, the Legislature later expanded it to all inmates under 26 at the time of the crime.

Parole for LWOP-Sentenced Murderers

by · Jul 21, 2025 9:47 am

In the many, many debates that I have had on capital punishment over the years, almost all of the opponents have promised the audience that we don’t need the death penalty to prevent release of murderers back in the community because we have this wonderful alternative of life without parole. The badly worded poll questions that opponents love to cite (see this post) involve offering life without parole as the alternative.

One of the problems with that argument is that there is no such thing as life in prison with no possibility of parole. Future governors, legislatures, or courts may create a possibility of parole even for the very worst murderers.

Tim Cruz has this article in the City Journal, titled Why Is Massachusetts Releasing First-Degree Murderers? Continue reading . . .

Revoking Federal Supervised Release

by · Jun 20, 2025 9:10 am

There is no parole, as such, in the federal sentencing system, but a sentence can include a period of “supervised release” following the term of incarceration. Under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(A), when imposing the original sentence, a federal judge can consider, among other factors, “the need for the sentence imposed” “to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense.” Can the judge consider that factor when deciding on a revocation of supervised release?

No, the Supreme Court decided today in Esteras v. United States, No. 23-7483. Why not? The simple answer is because Congress said so. The statute on supervised release, 18 U.S.C. § 3583(c), specifies the factors. Many of the factors used to set the initial sentence are included, but that one is conspicuously absent.

So why is there any difficulty at all? Continue reading . . .