No. 24-5060

Bert Hudson v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole

Lower Court: Pennsylvania
Docketed: 2024-07-12
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: constitutional-interpretation cruel-and-unusual-punishment cruel-punishment eighth-amendment furman-v-georgia mandatory-minimum parole parole-review second-degree-murder sentencing-guidelines sentencing-statutes
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Punishment Patent
Latest Conference: 2024-09-30
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether Pennsylvania's sentencing statutes for second-degree murder, which provide for a mandatory maximum sentence of life imprisonment with a required individualized minimum sentence and the right to parole reviews, violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment as interpreted in Furman v. Georgia.

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED After being rebuked. for forbidden cruelty by this Court's own landmark 1972 Furman decision, Pennsylvania's sentencing statutes enacted in response to that have quite unambiguously provided for a mandatory maximum sentence of life imprisonment WITH a required individualized minimum sentence WITH the right to parole reviews for cases of second degree murder. (

Docket Entries

2024-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2024-07-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-07-16
Waiver of right of respondent Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole to respond filed.
2024-07-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 12, 2024)

Attorneys

Bert Hudson
Bert Hudson — Petitioner
Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole
Hugh J. Burns Jr.Office of Attorney General of Pennsylvania, Respondent