Lancey Darnell Ray v. Kevin Stitt, Governor of Oklahoma
SocialSecurity DueProcess Securities JusticiabilityDoctri
Whether 34 U.S.C.A. § 12104's (Formerly cited as 42 U.S.C.A. § 13704) 85% requirement disturb States' settled parole statutes regarding eligibility for consideration for parole
QUESTIONS PRESENTED PREFACE TO QUESTIONS PRESENTED: Prisoners, by the very nature of their circumstances, are more than merely similarly situated; they are exactly situated. A prisoner’s first opportunity for a parole consideration should therefore occur with some semblance of equal incidence. In Oklahoma, that would mean eligibility for a consideration for parole at one-third (1/3) or one-fourth (1/4) of the sentence imposed . ' for all persons within the custody of the Department of Corrections as it had. been before the adoption of 42 U.S.C.A. § 13704’s 85% Rule. QUESTIONS: 1. Whether 34 U.S.C.A. § 12104’s (Formerly cited as 42 U.S.C.A. § 13704) 85% requirement mean to disturb States’ settled parole statutes regarding eligibility for consideration for parole. 2. Has Petitioner presented a justiciable question of fact concerning whether Okla. Stat. tit 21 § 12.1’s 85% Rule-adopted from 34 U.S.C.A. § 12104 (Formerly cited as 42 U.S.C.A. § 13704)-applied to eligibility for a consideration for parole, serve a legitimate state purpose. i