Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

London v. Subia

August 12, 2010

RICHARD LONDON, PETITIONER,
v.
R.J. SUBIA, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging the denial of parole in 2006. Pending before the court are petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1), respondent's answer (Doc. 6), and petitioner's reply (Doc. 10).

I. BACKGROUND

Petitioner is serving an indeterminate life sentence for two convictions of first-degree murder. Petitioner appeared at a parole suitability hearing in June 2006, at which time he was represented by counsel. In denying parole, the Board of Prison Terms ("Board") noted the following: (1) the facts of the commitment offense; (2) petitioner's escalating history of pre-conviction criminal conduct; (3) petitioner's unstable social history; (4) petitioner's prison disciplinary record; (5) the need to engage in further self-help programming; and (6) the lack of concrete, goal-oriented parole plans.

As to the commitment offense, the Board stated:

... The panel noted it was carried out in an especially cruel and callous, and multiple victims were attacked and killed in the same incident -- Wilbert Jackson and Sally Voye. The offense was carried out in a very dispassionate and calculated manner such as an execution-style murder in that the victims were followed from a party. You waited for them to get out of your vehicle, I think you described, for approximately 30 minutes; and then, because your crime partner indicated that they wanted to do it now, they were both shot inside of the vehicle; and subsequently the crime partner took the remaining four rounds that were in the.38 caliber weapon you had, returned, and fired an additional four rounds in the vehicle. The offense was carried out in a manner which demonstrates exceptionally callous disregard for human suffering in that we had multiple shots fired into a very confined area, killing both victims. And the motive for the crime -- I think you described it today -- was militant politics with respect to Mr. Jackson, with respect to Ms. Voye was an unfortunate companion choice, that she certainly didn't fit the profile or there was no indication that she fit the profile....

The Board commented on petitioner's pre-offense criminal history as follows:

... So far as the previous record, we did note that you did have an escalating pattern of criminal conduct and violence and there had been a history of unstable and tumultuous relationships with others. You railed from society's previous attempts to correct your criminality through juvenile camp, county jail, parole, and the prior prison term. So far as criminality, it consisted of burglary, petty theft, Health & Safety violations, receiving stolen property, and violations of probation and parole. There is also an indication that, with respect to social history, drugs and gangs were a significant influence, including the use of heroin at the age of 16....

Next, the Board commented on petitioner's institutional behavior:

... So far as your institutional behavior, you've done well. The one thing we're going to encourage you to do is make sure, before the next hearing, you do an Olsen Review and that all of your N.A. and other chronos, that you know are in existence, are contained inside of the C-File. So far as the misconduct while incarcerated, we noted that you had six 128(a) counseling chronos, the last one being 11 of 2000 for the improper hanging of items in your cell. And the last 115 was then July 20, 2000, for delaying a peace officer. You've had a total of 12....

The Board next discussed petitioner's institutional programming:... Recommendations to you for your behavior institutionally, one of the things that we're going to encourage you to do is explore re-entry workshop options. See what you can do to identify any new programs that may be available. If there are no programs available, any material that you can review with respect to re-entry workshops or re-entry issues. Also, to the degree that you can, identify any anger management and stress reduction programs or readings in anger management and stress reduction. Likewise, the area of communications -- anything that's available to you in the area of communications. And, basically, the reason we're giving this to you is we think you'll be a more viable candidate; and these are the things that we want you to focus on between now and your next hearing....

As to anger management, the record reveals that petitioner completed a four-session course in November 2006 -- after the June 2006 parole suitability hearing. There is no evidence of the completion of any anger management programming before November 2006. Finally, as to petitioner's parole plans, the Board stated:

... The other thing that I'm going to encourage you to do -- I think you're a bright person and you can sit down and do this -- and that would be to sit down and actually write out what your business plan and your goals are going to be upon your release. You may have -- it wasn't before us today -- you may have done that, because once you identify your goals, then, of course, that's going to set in motion the steps that you are going to have to take -- at what sequence -- because you can't do everything all at once. And to tell you the truth, the length of time you've been down, just getting out is going to be rather overwhelming, so I would encourage you -- have legitimate goals, but also have legitimate ideas as to the timeframe and don't take too ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.