Special considerations for sex offenders - Columbia Law School

In the event of travel, another parole officer will supervise the sex offender while outside ofthe usual bounded area. 69New York courts have so far upheld special parole conditions on convicted sex offenders.The courts have found that the decision of the Division of Parole to impose special conditionson a prior offender is not subject to court supervision. 70 As a parolee, you are underadministrative supervision of officials whose decisions are final and beyond review by acourt, so long as they do not violate any statutory requirements and are reasonable and notarbitrary when considered in the context of your record. 713. Incarceration Beyond Your Conditional Release DateWhen you are incarcerated and nearing release in New York State, the Parole Board willrequire that you inform them of where you plan to live after you leave prison. 72 Additionally,the Parole Board has the power to deny approval of your planned living arrangements. 73Prisoners who fail to obtain the required approval from the Division of Parole may be heldbeyond their conditional release date. 74 New York courts have consistently found that it iswithin the discretion of the Division of Parole to impose special conditions upon a prisonereven after his release. The courts have further held that a condition of parole that requiresthat a parolee reside in an approved residence has a rational basis because of (1) a prisoner’sstatus as a sex offender, (2) a prisoner’s failure to participate in available sex offendertreatment programs, 75 or (3) a prisoner’s previous violent conduct. 76 Common restrictionsimposed by the Parole Board include restrictions prohibiting you from living in areas nearschools or institutions that care for children under the age of 18. 77 Because residencyrestrictions are sometimes determined by the state and sometimes by local (county, city,69. Raul Russi, New York State Division of Parole, Guidelines for the Supervision of SexOffenders (1994).70. See Ahlers v. N.Y. State Div. of Parole, 1 A.D.3d 849, 849, 767 N.Y.S.2d 289, 289 (3d Dept.2003) (determining that a parole officer was allowed to require that a convicted sex offender attendsubstance and alcohol abuse treatment programs as a condition of the offender’s parole and that thisdecision was “beyond judicial review”); Gerena v. Rodriguez, 192 A.D.2d 606, 606, 596 N.Y.S.2d 143,144 (2d Dept. 1993) (holding that decisions of the New York State Division of Parole concerning therelease of an inmate to parole supervision, including imposition of any special conditions, arediscretionary and beyond review of the courts if made in accordance with the law).71. M.G. v. Travis, 236 A.D.2d 163, 167, 169, 667 N.Y.S.2d 11, 14 (1st Dept. 1997) (citingBriguglio v. N.Y State Bd. of Parole, 24 N.Y.2d 21, 28, 246 N.E.2d 512, 516, 298 N.Y.S.2d 704, 710(1969) to support the proposition that decisions of the parole board cannot be reviewed by the courts, aslong as the parole board does not violate any statutory obligations, and reviewing the board’s decisionto determine whether it was arbitrary or capricious).72. N.Y. Exec. Law § 259-c (McKinney 2005 & Supp. 2006) (describing generally the functions,powers, and duties of the State Board of Parole).73. See Monroe v. Travis, 280 A.D.2d 675, 676, 721 N.Y.S.2d 377, 378 (2d Dept. 2001) (holdingthat the Parole Board was justified in refusing to grant conditional release to a convicted sex offenderuntil the prisoner found housing that was satisfactory to the Parole Board).74. Monroe v. Travis, 280 A.D.2d 675, 676, 721 N.Y.S.2d 377, 378 (2d Dept. 2001) (holding ParoleBoard was justified in refusing to grant conditional release to convicted sex offender until he foundsatisfactory housing).75. People ex. rel. Wilson v. Keane, 267 A.D.2d 686, 686, 700 N.Y.S.2d 408, 409 (3d Dept. 1999)(finding that due to petitioner’s history as a sex offender and his failure to participate in available sexoffender treatment programs, the condition that petitioner reside in an approved residence wasrationally based).76. Billups v. N.Y. State Div. of Parole, 18 A.D.3d 1085, 795 N.Y.S.2d 408 (3d Dept. 2005)(holding that due to petitioner’s prior violent acts with his daughter, the condition that he reside in anapproved residence was rational).77. New York State Parole Handbook: Questions and Answers Concerning Parole Release andSupervision 22 (Sept. 2007), available at http://parole.state.ny.us/Handbook.pdf .