Gary Swarthout, Warden, Petitioner v. Damon Cooke. (562 U.S. 216)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided January 24, 2011 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 562 U.S. 216 · 131 S. Ct. 859
- Decided
- January 24, 2011
- Term
- October Term 2010
- Vote
- 9–0
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Per Curiam. I California’s parole statute provides that the Board of Prison Terms “shall set a release date unless it determines that . . . consideration of the public safety requires a more lengthy period of incarceration.” Cal. Penal Code Ann. § 3041(b) (West Supp. 2010). If the board denies parole, the prisoner can seek judicial review in a state habeas petition. The California Supreme Court has explained that “the standard of review properly is characterized as whether 'some evidence’ supports the conclusion that the inmate is unsuitable for parole because he or she currently is dangerous.” In re Lawrence, 44 Cal. 4th 1181, 1191, 190 P. 3d 535, 539 (2008). See also In re Shaputis, 44 Cal. 4th 1241, 1253-1254, 190 P. 3d 573, 580 (2008); In re Rosenkrantz, 29 Cal. 4th 616, 625-626, 59 P. 3d 174, 183 (2002). A Respondent Damon Cooke was convicted of attempted first-degree murder in 1991, and a California court sentenced him to an indeterminate term of seven years to life in prison with the possibility of parole. In November 2002, the board determined that Cooke was not yet suitable for parole, basing its decision on the “especially cruel and callous manner” of his commitment offense, App. to Pet. for Cert. 50a; his failure to participate fully in rehabilitative programs; his failure to develop marketable skills; and three incidents of misconduct while in prison. The board…
Excerpt of a 11,368-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.