Alabama House Bill HB228

Alabama 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/4/23
• Refer: 4/4/23
• Report Pass: 4/26/23

Caption

Relating to pardons and paroles; to amend Sections 15-22-26, 15-22-28, 15-22-37, and 15-22-43, Code of Alabama 1975, to require the Board of Pardons and Paroles to give weighted consideration to an inmate's age when determining whether to grant parole, to require the board to hold a rehearing once parole is denied for certain inmates, to provide for appellate relief for a prisoner with a serious chronic health condition who was denied parole in certain circumstances; to require the board to hold a medical parole hearing within a specified period of time of an inmate becoming eligible for medical parole; provide for appellate relief for an inmate who was denied medical parole; to amend Section 14-14-5, Code of Alabama 1975, to provide that an inmate released on medical furlough may reside in any state; to add Section 15-22-25.5 to the Code of Alabama 1975, to provide that an inmate may attend his or her parole hearing virtually; and to make nonsubstantive, technical revisions to update the existing code language to current style.

Impact

This bill seeks to create more equitable parole opportunities for older inmates and those with serious health issues. It allows for medical parole hearings to be held within 30 days of an inmate being eligible and enables those on medical furlough to reside in any state. This marks a shift towards a system recognizing the needs of aging and chronically ill inmates, reflecting a growing consideration for health factors in the criminal justice system. If the board does not provide the required improvement plan following a parole denial, it must conduct a new hearing within 90 days, ensuring timely reconsideration.

Summary

House Bill 228, introduced by Representative England, amends several sections of the Code of Alabama 1975 relating to pardons and paroles. The bill mandates that the Board of Pardons and Paroles must consider an inmate's health condition more heavily when making parole decisions. Specifically, the legislation emphasizes that inmates aged 50 and older or those who have served at least 10 years and are denied parole must be reconsidered within two years, with the board mandated to provide a detailed improvement plan to enhance their prospects for future parole success.

Contention

While the bill aims to improve the parole process for vulnerable inmates, concerns may arise about the implications for public safety and recidivism. Critics might argue that placing significant weight on health conditions could lead to increased parole grants, potentially raising risks if not adequately assessed. Furthermore, the inclusion of provisions for virtual attendance at parole hearings suggests a modernization of the system, which might also be met with skepticism regarding its effectiveness in maintaining accountability and engagement in the process. Stakeholders will likely debate the balance between compassion for inmates' health issues and the need to protect the community.