C) While parole commissioner perfunctorily acknowledged Appellant intended to reside in Syracuse, and had assurance letters from CNY Works, the parole board ignored Appellant possessed an application to enroll in a graduate degree program at Syracuse University. The parole board further failed to consider Appellant received over 500 letters of support from his community, elected officials and community representatives, including members of clergy(s) and social activists. The overwhelming support for Appellant's release on parole further indicate the extent of societies desire and anticipation for Appellant to be released on parole and be welcomed back into the community and society at large. The wide variety of community support is in clear opposition and contradistinction from the decision of the parole board having " ... concern for the public safety and welfare ... " and "Your discretionary release, at this time, would thus not be compatible with the welfare of society at large, and would tend to deprecate the seriousness of the instance offense(s), and undermine respect of the law." There is no way to discover how the August 1, 2006, parole board was able to make this assessment and judgment, when all material and physical evidence as provided by the community to the parole board states the very opposite. Appellant's legal representative provided the parole board a thorough and complete parole plan that the parole board ignored and failed to discuss.

The parole board hearing record served to indicate the August 1, 2006, parole board's predisposition was to deny release to Appellant. Furthermore, the August 1, 2006, parole board's ultimate decision confirms a disconnect between what the parole board decided, and what Appellant in 35 years of imprisonment has accomplished. This includes the volume of institutional accomplishments, the great level of community support, the extent of the parole plan, the lack of a disciplinary record, and more importantly, the favorable victim's impact statement advocating for the release of the Appellant.


- 5 -

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]