ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459


Monthly Meetings | Recordings (04/16 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

 

 

Living with 290

Living with 290: Early Discharge from Parole Granted

I wanted to share an experience that might provide everyone a better idea of the current climate in the California CDCR Parole arena. I was just approved for an early discharge from parole and have an appointment to go in tomorrow to have my ankle monitor removed and be officially discharged.

The plea deal I took, for a 288(a) L&L w/child under 14 included a 6 year prison term at 85% and 3 years of parole. When I was released, I was informed that my parole was now 10 years due to changes in the law. I am on Parole in Riverside County, CA.

The 3 year anniversary of my release was April 1st. My Parole Agent recommended me for early discharge, as did his supervisor, a PA-III, and the “DA” … which I only know as “District Attorney” but I suspect may be the title of someone within CDCR? He said he would know in approximately two weeks, however to not get my hopes up, because they’ve not seen anyone approved for an early discharge with my length of parole, only “talk” of it.

Yesterday, he received a status change. The BPH returned my review with an early discharge approved as of May 3rd.

This story should provide HOPE for those under lengthy parole terms and their families. I’ve been continuously employed since my release. I’ve never missed one group session of sex offender therapy. I was open and honest during one on one’s. I was polite and respectful to parole staff and agents. I passed all of my polygraph examinations. I’ve had stable housing. I participated in the process, I didn’t fight it.

I wish everyone the same fortune.

More Living with 290

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 
Subscribe
Notify of
130 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I told the truth to every polygraph question. The machine said I was slightly deceitful.
Humiliated by clinician in group and sent to the back of the “graduated sanctions” line. F#€ked

Don’t allow people to humiliate you. Only you can allow that. So don’t.

You should have told the clinician that he/she was an idiot for believing a machine that everyone knows is shit. That is the definition of an idiot. Repeat as often as necessary.

@Will Alen. I didn’t stand for it. I got kicked out. P.O. violated me!. $7k into a lawyer now and the judge wants me in jail. Goodbye Charlie.

Good for you. Harassers never know how to handle strong people. I truly believe that most of these “jobs”, especially probation officers, attract some of the worst, talentless people in humanity. Decent people don’t want to do those jobs. There are some exceptions of course, but few.

I could see a program kicking out a person if he/she was belligerent or wouldn’t participate or try. But only a scam program would kick out a person for speaking his/her mind and standing up for him/herself. I do believe that most of these “treatment” programs are scams and really little more than just “legalized” theft. So it wouldn’t surprise me. Most probation/parole/scam treatment people have no idea how to help or improve society. They are dregs themselves.

It takes a strong person to stand up for principles when there are significant consequences. Congratulations. You’ll be even stronger later.

AMAZING! Congrats!!!! Wow
Maybe SB145 WILL PASS! along w/Tiered Reg.
Maybe they’re listening to the CASOMB board finally.
You hopefully the first of many for early release off of Parole

Congratulations! Glad to hear it worked for you. I hope it’ll work for many others as well!

I can corroborate this. In my group (Orange County) one person is almost at his halfway point for a 10 year parole. He was given a form to sign for earned discharge credits (I read it) which stated he would be eligible for early release at the halfway point. It also said if you hadn’t violated parole in the first 2 1/2 years you would be eligible after 3 years, which may have happened to the original poster here. So if anyone is just starting out, please don’t violate parole!

The others in group haven’t been given a form yet, but my understanding is they may not give it to you until you approach the halfway point.

The counselors also told us 4 weeks ago that we may see this kind of paperwork, and they were right.

Tell the truth to the polygraph machine but it says you are showing some deception. . Years of loyal hard work down the s%!tter. Can’t “graduate” from treatment. Can’t.

Now this earlier release bill which state is this for?

The state of California

I got a hold of the form I talked about and am posting it:

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
NOTIFICATION OF EARNED DISCHARGE CRITERIA
CDCR 1605 (04/17)

REQUIREMENTS FOR NON-SEX OFFENDERS

If you completed the last 180 days of your prison term in a community based re-entry program, you must complete the first 3 months of your parole without any revocation or absconding, then three months* without any violations, then three months* of minimal supervision without any violations, for a total of nine months, before you can submit a request for Earned Discharge Consideration.

If you did not complete the 180 days of your prison term in a community based re-entry program, you must complete an intensive program at least six-months long. While on parole, you must complete the first 180 days of parole without any revocation or suspension, then three months* withoout any violations, then three months* of minimal supervision without any violations, for a total of twelve months, before you can submit a request for Earned Discharge Consideration.

REQUIREMENTS FOR SEX OFFENDERS

If you have ever been convicted of a crime requiring registration pursuant to Penal Code sections 290-294, you must complete half of your total parole term without any revocation or suspension, then three months* without any violations, then three months* of minimal supervision without any violations, before you can submit a request for Earned Discharge Consideration. If your parole is revoked during the first half of your total parole term, you must complete the remainder of the first half, or 12 months (whichever is greater), without any violations.

You must also complete Sex Offender Treatment.

* If you commit a violation during any of these periods, even if you are not arrested, the period starts over.

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS: Based on your specific criminal history and/or criminogenic needs you must also meet the following selected criteria:

If you are able to work, maintain an average of 25 hours per week of verifiable employment. If you are unable to work due to an approved circumstance, you must receive financial assistance to meet basic living needs.

Hello everyone, this feels like an appropriate topic to ask this question. I have been reading about this bill AB-1182 Post Release Supervision of Offenders. Here is the link to the bill:

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB1182

It looks to me like any of us on parole will finally be up for early discharge if this goes through. What I’m trying to figure out is how long it will take for this bill to make it through the system. From what I can see in the wording, a lot of RSOs on parole will find relief. I can’t seem to find a lot of information out on the net.

Any help deciphering this mess would be helpful. I have read the bill three times and still feel unsure of what it offers.

Thanks

Probation is easy if you’re not doing anything wrong and the fact that people are getting early discharged off of 10 years probation or parole for pc290 charges just shows the fact that people are starting to wake TF up
10 year probation thats just ridiculous I’m glad to see this brother find some peace and light at the end of a very dark tunnel ..

Congratulations on early release from parole!

Does anyone have any insight to early termination of probation? We are in Riverside County too, and husband is on County Probation, but about to hit the halfway mark. No violations or issues with probation. Just wondering if anyone has had success with getting it shortened.

@AnonMom

I had my probation terminated early. Though I was originally adjudicated in Orange County, I moved to San Francisco and my case and probation was transferred to San Francisco. It was SF that granted my early termination, reduction to misdemeanor and expungement.

File the 1203.3 motion to request early termination of probation. If your husband is qualified to have his charges reduced to misdemeanor (17b) and expunged (1203.4), this can be done at the same time.

He will need to have a letter from probation stating they have no objection to the early termination. Generally, the judge will listen to the probation department’s recommendation. Has he completed the sex offender “treatment” program? Usually this has to be completed first (or have at least a year completed); the date he was adjudicated might make a difference. A letter from his counselor stating that he has been successful or has successfully completed the program along with the passing of the lie detector test should also be submitted. He will also need to write a letter to the court stating why he is asking for early termination. Have several character reference letters from people in his network.

I do know the forms have changed since I filed in 2014. I was also able to file without an attorney or even any assistance with an attorney. There was also no cost. I’ll go through my records when I get home tonight and follow up with you.

@NPS-

No he has not completed “treatment”. He has successfully attended for almost 1.5 years, missing only one day because of really really bad illness. He is always on time and pays in full (not even a reduced fee), passed poly, and has never had issues with PO, in fact has had a supportive PO. I’ve heard that treatment is paced to keep you there for the whole three years though. He was charged and convicted in 2017, so I don’t think he qualifies for reduction, even though the attorney said he would when he took the plea. I don’t mind hiring an attorney, I just don’t want to spend the money and effort if there is no chance and nobody has been successful.

I appreciate your insight, we just want what’s best for our family-my husband is doing his absolute best to overcome
all this, just like so many here, so I appreciate your time in sharing your experience.

The law is written as follows: PC 1203.067 – Persons placed on formal probation on or after July 1, 2012, shall successfully complete a sex offender management program, following the standards developed pursuant to Section 9003 , as a condition of release from probation. The length of the period in the program shall be not less than one year, up to the entire period of probation, as determined by the certified sex offender management professional in consultation with the probation officer and as approved by the court.

Therein lies the problem. The length of time is determined by the trio specified above. I was adjudicated in 2010 and the law at the time was “participate” not less than one year. The law was changed to “successfully complete”. Also at the time, passing the polygraph meant successful completion of the program. I don’t know how it is today with regards to the polygraph. Once you passed, that was it. However, it seems like they want to keep probationers in the program for the entire duration even after passing the polygraph; a total money grabber. If your husband’s probation officer is supportive and he’s passed the polygraph, he should discuss the possibility of having the treatment deemed successfully completed. That’s the only way one can terminate probation (according to the law). Consult with an attorney who specializes in sex offense laws and can write a motion for early termination of probation.

I was just notified in my containment meeting that I was doing great and they are recommending switching from to parole agent check-ins to one per month. Then they also dropped the bombshell that my parole was now 10 years from 3!!! When I “took the deal” three years was said. This is crazy! How the heck can they change the deal?

I am in a similar situation. Here is what they are not telling you. The penal code 3000 was changed in around 2010, to say that we must do up to 10 years of parole. So technically you aren’t supposed to do 10, it is supposed to be worst case scenario. If you read on to 3001, you will discover that your PDD is actually 3 years. You should look it up. It basically says that you must be released at the 3 year mark unless they have good reason to detain you longer. That’s where things get muddled. Look up your rights. If you go to the root & rebound website they offer a bunch of legal information on this topic. It’s helpful. Good luck. Don’t give up no matter what crap they try to feed you.

Hey Shawn, they didn’t discharge you in April? I thought that’s when your 3 year early discharge review date was.

@Joe

Nope, they have not discharged me. I’m still working on it and waiting to see the letter explaining why they didn’t. I’ll likely be talking this all the way through the habeas corpus petition. Things are never easy with these people.

The folks are Root and Rebound are awesome! I was offered a job at one of the large hardware stores. Passed the onsite drug test. Failed the background. Even though my crime had nothing to do with the job in question, they rescinded the job offer, which is a violation of the law. R&R worked with me to prepare the humiliating but required documentation and statements as to why I’m “worthy” of working at their business. They will either hire me or find themselves in court explaining how my being a sex offender (low risk) is dangerous to their business.

“How can they change the deal?”…. That is the million dollar question that so many of us have been asking in our own situations for years. I grew up naively thinking that the government in America was for the most part about law, about justice, and truth, and all of that boy scout stuff. Well, it’s not. It’s corrupt. Our state and federal government is a corrupt seething cesspool. Law enforcement is corrupt, criminal justice, probation, parole, it’s all corrupt. They see themselves as good people and look at people who’ve done crimes like you’ve done as lesser people that they can get away with doing that to. Because they’re the righteous ones, and you’re irredeemable, you don’t deserve anything good in their eyes, so they’ll just do things to you that they see fit, or whatever they think they can get away with, and you can’t do anything about it, because nobody will take your side, because you’re a piece of excrement to them.

I feel bad for them, because I belong to Christ, and God sees what these people have done, and are doing, and it’s not going to go well for them in the end…

I just want to add. They did the same thing to my husband. He also was sentenced to 6 yrs prison, 3 yrs parole. At release from prison, he was told its 5 yrs parole. Then they told him, no its now 10 (this about the 4 yr mark)
At around the 5 1/2 yr mark of parole, and right after his annual meeting with his agent (I think this one was number 18 on the list of parole agent changes) they called him two days later and told him he needed to come in. Didnt say why.
Well hub was working and wouldnt be able to make it before they closed. His agent said….ok. well come in first thing in the morning.
He then called him back and said…….You can cut off your ankle monitor, you’ve been released from parole. His *counselor* also called him and told him the same thing.
Well hub refused to cut the thing off, and made them do it. I told hub he had to take a photo of the agent cutting it off. (no dummy here)

So just his experience.
He has not paid restitution (bad idea cause that will catch up to him)
He did everything he was supposed to while on parole.
He did complete his therapy classes. (group meetings mostly)
He had no idea and from the sounds of it, neither did his parole agents that he was going to be released.
I was happy because he could move back home then. (I didnt want parole agents all up in my business or in my home anytime they wanted to come in and due to the residency restrictions our house is too close to parks and schools, so hub lived separately)

Thank you for sharing your experience. It gives me hope.

Hey Shawn,
Did you get any violations since you’ve been on parole? Did your parole officer approve of early discharge or did he/she go against it? Your still in Sacramento right?

@Joe

I did have a violation. When I first got out I had pictures of my wife and my daughter. They arrested me for having pictures of my daughter. That was 3 years ago. The crazy thing is that on the paper they gave me denying early release it also says I have a violation from a month ago. I had a big old vintage stuffed monkey from the early 1970s, nothing you would give to kid, and I was not arrested for having it, but my parole officer advised me to get rid of it. So how is that considered a violation? I am going to try and fight this none the less.

What county are you guys in?

Anyone know how to submit a request for “Earned Discharge Consideration”
Is there a form?

@RKD,

I posted the form a few scrolls up. My agent told me they were told to give these forms to all parolees. Maybe it is taking a while for you. You don’t file one, they give it to you to sign.

However, my agent said it doesn’t apply to people who have no presumptive discharge date, which is (I believe) 288(a)s. She said she wasn’t sure though and she would find out for me. I will update when I hear something.

You could also file a 22 asking to be let out of parole, then a 602, then go to court and ask the judge. There is a story on this board of someone who did that after 3 years of 10 year parole (he was a very good parolee).

@Chris…Thanks
I am 4yrs into a 5yr.
Totally clean. Contra Costa Co.
I think I will give it a try.

Has anyone heard anything in regards to 20 year parole? I believe I was supposed to have 5 and it turned into 20… any info grateful appreciated.

My understanding is that if you where sentenced with the understanding that your period of parole is 5 years. You are not subject to the new parole period. If your conviction was result of a plea agreement. The term on parole would also be part of the agreement. If conviction was result of trial the term of parole would had been stated at sentencing.. Check your transcripts. I do not believe a retractive application of new effects direct consequences of a plea or conviction. Only on collateral .

Listen guys, SB 1182 is under submission, meaning they got blow back against it–there is so much money involved with sex offenders. Job security for all involved–including the doctors. If we are “cured” they are unemployed. Keep the myth going. According to CDCR’s own stats we have the lowest rate of re-offending of all offenses except pot possession and meth manufacturing. Go figure.

I got you though. I got info that they do not want you to have.

So, I am understanding that ab1182 will give no relief for anyone on parole over 5 years in duration… is this correct?

10 years parole on a 288(a) charge? I thought the law was 20 years 6 months for 288(a)? My BF took a plea deal that said max of 4 years parole but now has been told it’s 20 year 6 months because of the 288(a) charge. Is that not correct? Can it be 10 years? Please let me know. Thanks!

I was put up for early discharge at the 2 year mark after release, after serving 24 years for PC 290 offense and murder offense, because crimes were committed in 1992, and 3 year max parole term is the term at time of crime. All agreed for discharge but BPH denied due to saying I must complete sex offender treatment. I provided evidence that NOT ONE PC 290 offender at the treatment place, in their 7 years of operation, has EVER completed sex offender treatment. The reason is because they use failed polygraphs, they make you repeat the same 3 books over and over, and they only put you on titration. So what parole is saying is that for a PC 290 offender, there is no early discharge, because it is an impossible standard to meet, to complete sex offender treatment. This practice is akin to the definition of RACKATEERING. The treatment place is profiting, while strong arming a client by force, where the client is paying with years of his life, with the threat of going back to prison for non-compliance (thiink of one paying organized crime for protection under threat of harm). This is wrong.

HUGE DIFFERENCE between 288a & 288(a) …. 288a will get you the 20 years. 288(a) = 10 years.

My husband committed his offense in 2010 & was convicted in 2011 for 288(a) L&L w/ child under 14. After being deemed by a psychologist NOT A PEDOPHILE, NOT A RISK OF REOFFENDING, he was sentenced the lowest term of 3 years prison followed by 3 years parole. In 2014 few months before his release from prison, he was forced to agree to 5 YEARS. Then 1st thing when he got out & reported to parole, they CHANGED HIS 5 YEARS PAROLE TO 20 YEARS!?!?! 1st 602 got DENIED. 2nd 602 was PARTIALLY GRANTED FROM 20 YEARS TO 10 YEARS… if anybody cares enough to read this far into what ive wrote can you PLEASE TELL ME IF YOUVE EVER HEARD OF A CASE LIKE THIS.

@Ashley

The change for his parole after he came out, was there even trial for it? Or did probation tell him that?

The same happen to me…from a 3 year parole term assigned by court to 10 years that cdc made

Are you allowed to live with your own biological child while on parole? Does anyone have a list of parole conditions?

To your comment the answer is yes! After my release from prison my wife got pregnant with our daughter and at that time my P.O. was very adamant on not allowing me to be with my wife and daughter, who was in the NICU due to an early birth. But after going to a lawyer and seeking guidance I informed my P.O. and his supervisor that I had legal right to be with my new family and upon looking at my parole conditions there was nothing stating that I couldn’t be with my biological child. So yes you can be with your biological child as long as said child was not your victim.

@alone,

The situation sounds horrible and terrible and tragic. While on parole or probation the PO has enormous power over you and your circumstances. I got married while on probation and the court ordered counselor threatened to violate me if I married. We worked it out and but it made for a rough couple of weeks.

Parole conditions,’to my understanding, are unique to each individual/case. If you do not have a copy of your conditions you can contact your attorney (if you had one), or possibly the public defenders office might be able to help you.

Without more information not sure there is much more I can offer. Work to the best of your ability to get you PO and anyone else in the legal system on your side. It takes a long time and a lot of effort to gain even a little trust, but it can be the difference in getting conditions changed.

I hope your situation can improve

I am on 5 year parole for 288.1(a) Have been on parole for 3 years and 21 days today, I have not been notified of BPH Completing a good cause determination and am looking for advice on how to proceed,

@ Anthony,

They are supposed to send you a letter telling you their decision, but they never do. I usually fill out a 22 form requesting the letter of determination. If they never reviewed your case then you may request to be released from parole. Some how they seem to always remember to deny early release.

Thanks Shawn, that’s what I was thinking I am planning on waiting for the 30 day Period to be over then request it, and if they did it appeal it, or if they didn’t then request release… or best case is they let me off…

Does anyone know the name of the good cause evaluation? My parole officer doesn’t know nor does BPH and DAPO, I talked with all three today, not sure how to proceed… been on parole 3 yr 1 month and 2 days now…Please help! I want to be off parole if possible

A good cause evaluation is found in Title 15 “Early Discharge Criteria” which states that after 3 YEARS of continuous parole, the Board has only up to 30 days after 36 months, to find good cause to RETAIN a person on parole. Good Cause is defined as that the parolee has 1). Abscounded parole, meaning took off. 2). Has been placed on psychiatric hold 3). Has had parole revocated and returned to custody for a violation of conditions or new charge. Thus, if a parolee can meet the 36 months of continuous parole, this is the only criteria the Board can use to RETAIN on parole. The decision to retain must be in writing and a copy provided to the parolee so he can appeal if necessary. If you are not given a copy, it is a due process violation in which you can win by filing a habeas corpus petition in superior court. But if you are a determinate sentence prisoner, you must exhaust administrative remedies first by filing a 602 that the Board did not provide you with a copy of the decision, first. Additonally, if you violate any condition of parole or have parole revoked AFTER the 37 months period (this includes the 30 days for review), then you can win in Court that the Board and CDCR lost jurisdiction to revoke your parole, where the revocation occurred after the 37 months (where they never provided you a written decision and the opportunity to appeal that decision). Case law is clear on this. Good luck, I hope this helps you.

I believe this info, although I’ve never known anyone to get a copy of the retain decision.

BTW 3722 also states that this can be used to retain on parole:

(4) Supervision Needed. The parolee is in special need of continued supervision for the safety of the parolee or of the public.

Any comments?

To answer your question, the BPH or CDCR uses that excuse on all PC 290 offenders to retain on parole. You can win in Court if you are ‘low risk’ (Non HRSO), because sex offender treatment is meant for ‘High Risk Offenders (HRSO) by statute. Also, if you can point to the Court that you have a low Static 99 score and CSRA score. The other successful way to challenge in Court is that the CDCR is denying you ‘early parole discharge’ using the excuse that you must complete sex offender treatment. Completion of sex offender treatment is not listed in Title 15 criteria to deny ‘early parole dsicharge’ See Title 15 Section 3722. Lastly, if you want to complete sex offender treatment after your first year on parole, file a habeas petition with the Court stating that the statute requires APPROVAL by the Court of a ‘completion date.’ The statute says specifically that a date of completion is determined by the parole agent, the sex offender supervisor, and AS APPROVED BY THE COURT. As you may know, there is no such thing as ‘completion of sex offender treatment’ and you will do the entire duration of parole without an early discharge. Hope this helps!

“Sex offender” “treatment” is quite a grift. What % of “patients” does it help? I’ll guess 5%. But it also does certainly make some % of the people just simply want to really harm other people and retaliate. What % is that? I’ll guess much higher than 5%.

All that aside, I do wonder why these grifters haven’t tried to force “treatment” on all kinds of other crimes. Do they not think there is money to made there? Or they think those crimes are normal and don’t need treatment? Makes no sense to me. They want to “treat” a person who looks at pictures but not a person who shoots someone with a gun. Yeah, sure, that’s all about public safety.

I agree, convicted murderers who are paroled, less than ONE PERCENT commit another crime. Unfortunately, society believes that parolees who served time for a sex offense or murder, are the most dangerous and a threat to public safety. Offenders such as serial arsonists, property offenders, thieves, these are not victimless crimes yet are perceived differently by society, with no desire or plan to provide them treatment. Statistically, they have a 70% or more percentage of recidivism. Numerous sex offenders required to complete sex offender treatment committed their PC 290 offense, ten, twenty, thirty, forty years ago, and have a CURRENT offense which is non PC 290. Many have minor crimes in relation to the more major (soliciting a minor over Internet -where minor was an undercover cop, urinating in public, 18 year old having sex with 17 year old). In summary, I believe treatment for ANY offender on parole is helpful for those who desire to participate. For those who do not desire to participate, with no desire to change their behavior, the requirement to be in treatment breeds anger, frustration, and hopelesness, perhaps doing more harm than good.

One of the rare occurrences i don’t agree with you Will. I did group therapy and gained a lot of insight from it. If you have a bad attitude going into it you will get nothing out of it and be back in the same boat or worse imo.

When I was on parole a few years ago, even non-“high-risk” sex offenders were required to do “treatment.” From my understanding, the high-risk designation is a fraud though, based on the Static 99R.

When I was in treatment, they separated the groups between non high-risk and high-risk, but we met at the same times (in different “treatment rooms”). The eight in non-high risk didn’t have a job (but we’re trying their best to find one) and all had at least one violation. The six in high risk had jobs (even though it was menial, like construction, fast food, clerical), and had non-contact crimes (cp, indecent exposure, peeping toms). We were all fairly young compared to the non-high risk group, too. And only one of us in the high-risk group of six had one violation (not me).

Again, from what I’ve seen, the HRSO label is complete bullshit (and so is the Static 99R). They really need to do more research into that “test” because from actually being on the ground, and actually seeing how parole designates people, the type of people given the high-risk HRSO designation actually seemed like the LEAST likely to reoffend.

The Static-99R is literally one of the worst things in RSO legislation because it opens the doors, and precedence, for Minority Report style legislation. A big problem in proving the inaccuracy in the Static-99R is that the underlying data is protected as a ‘trade secret,’ despite Karl Hanson in violation of APA Code of Ethics, and that all the ‘validation’ studies are in conflict-of-interest. Also, check out the following law review article from the University of North Carolina’s law review:

@Static-99R – Another well written article. On another note, have you noticed that the Static99.org site has changed to saarna.org? There is now an updated Coding Rules and Evaluator’s workbook, dated 9/28/21. It talks a lot about the offence free time, and here is the point that I have been making all along: “This workbook includes a chart denoting the Static-99R risk level upon release from the Index offence AND REDUCTIONS in risk level over time…NOTE that the Static-99R SCORE does not change. IT IS THE INTERPRETATION of the score (here, the risk level) that can change over time”. That is what needs to be urgently addressed as the DOJ does not INTERPRET the score and just goes by the number at the time of release that will never change. They have to be held accountable to be able to INTERPRET the score and adjust the risk level accordingly. I also believe that not only the score needs to be INTERPRETED but also how a score applies to certain offenders. How many people have actually been sampled for a specific offense? You can’t interpret a score if only based on a few offenders, it should be of a large group with the identical offense, otherwise, the score can not be valid. But that is a discussion for another time. For now, let’s just focus on the offence free time. I spelled offence with a “c” in case you want to do a search in the PDF.

Yes, I noticed the website name change a few months ago. My suspicion is that as the Static-99 tests are exposed as inaccurate, the “developers,” including Karl Hanson, are trying to distance themselves from the Static tests so that they can damage control their reputation, and peddle their next “test,” without getting too much attention in the transition.

The scores are misleading themselves because the “risk factors” are based off of a ‘particularly violent’ subset of Canadian (not American) offenders. Then, through Karl Hanson’s graduate students at Canada’s Carleton University–including a student by the name of Seung C. Lee–the Static-99R was cleverly manipulated as accurate, in California, through “validation studies” citing conflict-of-interest after conflict-of-interest. And the sample in California is misleading, because it mixes all types of offenses–from non-contact to contact offenses–together.

It’s absolutely disgusting what they did. And the politicians–and judges on OUR courts–fail to recognize these flaws. They, with law enforcement (i.e., parole, probation, police, sheriff, etc.), continue to use the Static-99 tests, under the guise of “SARATSO, in making policy decisions. It’s ironic because some of the most egregious recidivists, who our government have named laws after, score “low” on the Static-99R. I am convinced the Static-99R was pushed more for profit, as well as rationalization to proliferate treatment programs, than anything else.

I don’t even think the Static-99R is accurate upon release into the community, let alone accurate x years–or even a decade or more–after ‘release into the community.’ From what I saw, the Static-99R scores seem more like a crapshoot worthy of a Vegas casino (but without the benefits of the all-you-can-eat buffet).

Suffice to say, the Static-99R is definitely Circus Circus worthy material.

Last edited 1 month ago by The Static-99R Is A Scam

Penal Code Section 3000 says that the BPH shall have the “right to reconsideration of the length of parole and the conditions thereof.” This is the statutory line the BPH uses to establish early discharge for 290s. Because of its vagueness, and the procedure is not detailed in other laws, the BPH gets to fully govern how early discharge works for parolees with parole longer than 5 years. It is possible to “graduate” from treatment. Albeit they demand perfection. I have witnessed three parolees with 10-20 year parole “graduate” from Sharper Future and had early discharge granted. Your goal is to get on Maintenance, and from there you can apply for early discharge at the halfway point of your parole. The parole officer also has the discretion to recommend discharge at any point during the parole process. This is separate from the “earned discharge” outlined above.

LOL, with all the hoops Sharper Future (and “treatment” programs like it) puts people through, it just seems like a gigantic scam. The “Doctor” Tom Tobin should be ashamed of himself for starting that dirty business. With all the blood money he’s earned, I hope the higher powers give that dude any karma he may have coming to him.

Also, the newly released Model Penal Code literally recommends registration for only 11 specified sex offenses. And even for those 11 specified crimes, a 15 freakin’ year registration period. Not the stupid lifetime requirement, with a “petitioning” proce$$, that we have now.

My point is that how many people would not have to register as a “registered sex offender” under the newly released Model Penal Code? And how much money would Sharper Future, and so-called treatment programs like it, lose if the Model Penal Code would be enacted?

Demanding “perfection,” to go through a program rampant with civil rights violations, especially when the Model Penal Code would not even require registration for many of their “clients”/“patients,” is the most FU*K YOU that the government can give to its very own citizens.

The f*ck… even Russia doesn’t have a registered sex offender registry. America ain’t the land of the free.

I have a question. Hopefully it can be answered. If you signed a plea back then, would P.C. 1016.8 be a way to get your original 3 or 5 years parole back?
I mean this 3000 took over all sentences and pleas. It came from AB 1618.

I am still confused. I have a 10 year parole and I was told that I have a review at my halfway mark. I just found out that I have a review at the end of the year for discharge and that is my 3 year mark of parole. I have graduated from therapy and been on maintenance for the past 6 months. Hopefully they discharge me. I was told that no one leaves parole before their halfway mark.

How did it go? I’m curious I am in the same boat. My 3 years is the end of March 2022

I got denied for discharge. I am currently in the process of appealing the decision.

Was there any reason specified why it was denied?

My therapist told me that candidates are required to have a clean polygraph within the past six months and have been on maintenance for at least one year.

I have completed Treatment(passed maintenance phase) and passed all of my polygraphs( 3 years worth of polygraphs). They still denied me.

What was their reason for denial?

LOL bullshit. They’re going to give you the runaround, just like what they gave me. Off of parole for a few years now, but they told me I had a “great chance” of getting off at one year, two years, but ultimately had to do the whole parole period, even though I had no violations and did everything they told me. Complete bullshit. Government corruption.

I am still in the process of the appeal process. They have till may to respond.

I don’t have any verifiable documentation, because this is not in the DOM or Title 15. But my parole officer did confirm that early discharge is possible but not probable. Every year you have a discharge review. If you have not completed treatment or have a failed polygraph in the last two years then you are automatically disqualified. If you are up for consideration, your PO has to PERSONALLY endorse you for consideration. Now consideration doesn’t mean squat, it just means you are considered. This entails having to compile a lengthy report on your behalf. He told me this means gathering letters of recommendation. There is no set metric for a successful review, the goal is to simply paint a picture. You have to have financial sustainability and continuous residence, with no current defects from the perspective of parole. This includes family and community support. Also, I found a Title 15 Reg suggesting that HRSO are looked at with even more scrutiny. IF and only if your personal PO endorses you for consideration, then the supervisor also has to give their endorsement. Once the supervisor has their endorsement, then the DA (District Administrator) has to give their endorsement. I was told this one was a toss up. Most people get shot down at the PO or supervisor level – they can use reasons including, while the parolee is working they are not making enough money, the parolee has a lack of community endorsement, the parolee appears unstable, etc. After the DA gives their endorsement, then the case is sent to the BPH for review. Whom ultimately makes the final decision. But it all starts with your PO writing a lengthy report on your behalf to be “considered.” And lets be real, most PO’s are not interested.

This happened to me I was approved by my agent but denied by the District Administrator. I am still in the process of appealing it. I just got a letter that I am at the grievance coordinator level now with my appeals. They have till May to give me a answer.

Did the District Administrator specify why they denied you?

I was approved for discharge by my parole agent. Denied by the supervisor and the District Administrator. They pretty much said I need more supervision. I have done everything they told me to do: violation free, Completed Treatment, steady housing and employment and passed all of my polygraphs. I am a low risk too. I am kinda irritated by this.

I find it so interesting how everyone’s PO has a different idea of things. I think for the most part it’s poor training on their part. But I was recommended by my PO and his supervisor for early discharge and currently waiting the DAs decision. I was told I couldn’t get any letters to help me. And I haven’t completed treatment. They make it impossible to complete by making it impossible to get 21 papers perfectly written within 3 years. It was 20 papers and then they just added one leaving me one paper short of finishing which is just ironic. On top of that there’s one polygrapher that fails everyone and one that everyone seems to pass. This is all such BS. I have almost the same situation as the original post so I’m hoping I might get lucky as well

Supervisor and DA is telling me I have to do at least half of my 10 year parole. Makes no sense…. what is the point have me having a Discharge review when they say I have to do half of my parole term?? They are quoting a policy that doesn’t make sense.

Yeah that is extremely fishy. Tbh the DOM (Department of Operations Manual) specifies a difference between “early discharge review” and “earned discharge consideration”. Early discharge review can be done any time, but CDCR opts to start doing them at the 3-year mark of parole. Earned discharge consideration eligibility exists at the halfway mark (for you – 5 years). They’re lying and trying to say you’re not eligible for ‘earned discharge consideration’ (which is true), when in actuality this is a early discharge review, which is different.

I was told the same thing that there is a difference between “early” and “earned” but the PO supervisor is giving me the policy for earned discharge. My agent is telling me I fall under early discharge review policy. So they are confused and interpreting it differently. I am still awaiting on my 602. Do you know where I can find it in the DOM???

Here is a proposed change from 2020 detailing that ‘early discharge’ is not bound by interdepartmental policy:

https://www.cdcr.ca.gov/regulations/wp-content/uploads/sites/171/2020/08/NCR-20-12-master-file_ADA.pdf

“PC Section 3000 defines length of parole term and authorizes the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH) and DAPO to discharge a [sex offender] before the maximum possible parole term.”

Here is the most recent DOM:

https://www.cdcr.ca.gov/regulations/wp-content/uploads/sites/171/2022/03/CDCR-DOM_2022.pdf

It is A LOT, but 81022 is where most of the SO stuff is. The discharge review is Case Conference (Containment), which is a little bit before the SO stuff.

I just got denied again saying that I fall under the earned discharge process. I need to quote the policy for early discharge. Everyone is seeing it differently.

My mistake. ‘Early discharge’ and ‘Presumptive Discharge’ are asynchronous. I’m assuming that due to your length of parole, you are not given a ‘Presumptive Discharge Date’ (PDD). However, you are still eligible for ‘earned discharge’ through the discharge review process. When filing your 602, you should articulate that ‘nowhere in the Penal Code, Title 15, or the DOM, does it specify that half of my parole term must be complete before a discharge review can be conducted on my behalf.” Someone in my county just got discharged after 4 years with a 10-year term – with the DA and BPH approval. They are quoting a policy that is no longer in affect.

John, Thanks for the response. They are quoting a Memorandum 19-03 (amended). It states that I have to do 78 months of my 10 year parole, its on page 3 on the memo. Also my discharge authority is DAPO, my offense is after July 1, 2013. Anyone that has offense before 26 June 2012 follows under DAPO and BPH discharge authority. If you have any other advice please let me know. I am planning to do other 602 on this issue

So those who committed their offense after July 1, 2013 just have to get the DA to sign off, meaning they do not have to have the BPH approval? Also do you have the memo? Are you able to copy and paste (or type) wording specifying which PC code sections are included and earned discharge requirements?

They are quoting a 19-03 memorandum stating that I have to do 78 months of my 10 year parole. I think they are reading it wrong. It is for parolee that have DAPO discharge approval but denied by the BPH. If the commitment offense is after 1 July, 2013 you only need DAPO to discharge you.

Penal Code 3001 is the statutory legal basis for Discharge Review. Here is what it says about certain individuals sentenced to 10-year parole terms.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, when any person referred to in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 3000 has been released on parole from the state prison, and has been on parole continuously for six years and six months since release from confinement, the board shall discharge, within 30 days, the person from parole, unless the board, for good cause, determines that the person will be retained on parole. The board shall make a written record of its determination and the department shall transmit a copy thereof to the parolee.

——- most people with 10-year parole are not 3000(b)(3) parolees so the statute would not be relevant. I’m assuming this is what the memo is referring to as these parolees are still subject to the BPH even after July 1, 2013. Most 10-year parolees are 3000(b)(2)

Do you know who oversee DAPO? I am trying to figure out why I was issued a Discharge Review. Why are Parole agent involved on my Discharge Review date. I thought Parole Case Records staff in charge of that.

DAPO is oversaw by a director. Under the Director are Regional District Administrators (RDAs). Under RDAs are DAs, PA-III, etc. A memorandum is not legal policy. Policy is only enumerated in the California Code of Regulations, Title 15; Penal Code; and the Department of Operations Manual. When case records are reviewing your case, they are following legal policy. Not memorandums. When filing your 602, you need to mention that memorandums are not binding policy, but are only models to present policy in a concise format. As I have not seen the memorandum, it would be my guess that it follows the three legal frameworks (Penal Code, Title 15, and DOM).

As stated earlier, there is no mandate in the Penal Code OR Title 15 for earned discharge criteria for people paroled under 3000(b)(2) [10-year parole – most likely you], only for people paroled under 3000(b)(3) [10-year parole for limited cases – most likely not you]. I would make sure the memorandum is not talking about 3000(b)(3).

Also, in the event a discharge review is denied, in every circumstance, you are granted one the following year.

I am so confused about all of this. I wish I can attached the PDF of this memorandum

Can you type out which parts are relevant to you?

Below is the section in the memorandum that they are using for me. They way I read it, I think the 78 months timeframe applies to supervision categories CE and SE.

Categories CE and SE 
Categories CE, California Parole Supervision and Reintegration Model (CPSRM) and SE, Sex Offender Management Program (SOMP) shall be utilized as the supervision level for case(s) that have been discharged under DAPO authority, however still have remaining case(s) under BPH discharge authority. Once an offender is placed in the CE/SE category, a return to their prior category of supervision may be warranted due to a new criminal arrest or a serious violation of a condition of parole. 
NOTE: A homeless offender may be reduced to Category CE if the offender has met all other expectations and has not violated their conditions of parole within six months. Homeless sex offender parolees shall not be classified as SE due to the dynamic case factors governing residential stability. Additionally, parolees supervised on a gang GPS specialized caseload shall be removed from GPS monitoring when their supervision level is reduced to CE. Gang offenders shall also be placed on a CPSRM caseload while in CE. 
Parole Case Records (PCR) shall update the DRD in SOMS to 30 days prior to the minimum timeframes noted on the tables below, from Parole Date (PD), Revocation Release Date (RRD), or Reinstate Date (RI). The PVDTS shall notify the parole agent and unit supervisor (US) of the pending discharge review date 30 days prior to the due date. The discharge review shall appear on the parole agent’s Discharge Review Due screen in PVDTS. Auto populated and manually initiated Discharge Reviews shall be processed and completed by the due dates identified in PVDTS. If the unit supervisor makes a recommendation to discharge and the District Administrator makes the decision “Earned Discharge Denied/No Action”, an Earned Discharge Consideration Committee (EDCC) meeting shall be convened within 30 calendar days of the date of the request. Policy No. 19-04 (Amended), Parole Discharge Procedures, outlines the process to schedule an EDCC.

SOMP minimum Timeframes table
Total Parole term: 10 Yrs
Commitment offense 1192.7/667.5: N/A
Total Minimum: 78 Months

fthe parolee is retained on parole, upon receiving the DRR retaining the case, PCR shall update the new DRD in SOMS to 12 months from the retain date. The unit may complete a DRR prior to the 12 month date at any time the US/AOR deem the parolee has met EDC criteria. Case Conference Reviews (CCR) and Containment Team Meetings (CTM) shall be conducted quarterly to ensure parolees are informed of their EDC progress. When DAPO recommends “Earned Discharge” on a PC 3001 case and the BPH retains the case, the parolee shall be placed in CE/SE category and subsequent DRRs shall be scheduled 12 months thereafter. PC 3001 case will be reviewed as prescribed by Penal Code. PC 3000(b)(4) cases will be reviewed as (b)(5)(B) and referred to the BPH for final decision. In addition, if the case is retained by the BPH, DAPO staff shall request a Discharge Consideration Committee (DCC) with the BPH. The US shall schedule a DCC in accordance with current DAPO policy and procedures no later than the mandatory due date identified in PVDTS. Directive No. 15-01 (Revised), The Division of Adult Parole Operations Procedures for Referral to the Discharge Consideration Committee, outlines the process for requesting a DCC. 

Can you please forward all content after the SOMP Minimum Timeframes and before this

fthe parolee is retained on parole, upon receiving the DRR retaining the case, PCR shall update the new DRD in SOMS to 12 months from the retain date.

well that’s all of it. There is a table after the last paragraph dealing with category CE/SE about contacts, How often they deal with urinalysis.

That is frustrating. This memo seems unstructured and hastily put together. I’m also convinced it is relatively new. The old form said you only had to complete half (5 years). What I would see about is this:

When you met with your PO right after you were released from incarceration, you signed a bunch of forms and went through two interviews. In the DOM they are called the “initial” and “comprehensive” interview. One of the two mentioned Earned Discharge Criteria. I would try to find those forms you signed, or the summary filled out by your PO of the initial and comprehensive interviews. All parolees are required to complete them upon release.

Dom Section 81020.10

I just checked the DOM. You signed a document called “1650-B Section I” upon release and during the comprehensive interview. I would file a form 22 requesting to access that document. Also see if you can get Section II and III. One of the mentions Earned Discharge Criteria, and they are not allowed to give you another 1650-B. I would see what it says, and if it contradicts with the memo 19-03, I would file a 602 on that basis.

I think the 78 months is based on: 3001 (c)
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, when any person referred to in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 3000 has been released on parole from the state prison, and has been on parole continuously for six years and six months since release from confinement, the board shall discharge, within 30 days, the person from parole, unless the board, for good cause, determines that the person will be retained on parole. The board shall make a written record of its determination and the department shall transmit a copy thereof to the parolee.

I am under paragraph (2) of of subdivision (b). I need to find the penal code for discharge review for people under this subdivision that deals with 10 years and I can’t find it. Do you know the penal code? It only talks about 3 and 5 years.

3001 (a) (3)

(3) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, when any person referred to in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 3000 who was imprisoned for committing a violent felony, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5, has been released on parole from the state prison for a period not exceeding three years and has been on parole continuously for two years since release from confinement, or has been released on parole from the state prison for a period not exceeding five years and has been on parole continuously for three years since release from confinement, the department shall discharge, within 30 days, that person from parole, unless the department recommends to the board that the person be retained on parole and the board, for good cause, determines that the person will be retained. The board shall make a written record of its determination and the department shall transmit a copy thereof to the parolee.

I was going to write up my 602 based that the 78 months of continuous parole is for penal codes 667.51, 667.61 and 667.71, which does not apply for me. I would like to find the penal code that says I am eligible for a 3 year discharge review? and I can’t find it.

Unfortunately, I am not aware of any code sections referencing 3000(b)(2) 10-year parole discharge review periods. Also 3001(a)(4) says that the subsection is no longer operational after the data the paragraph was added, so only 3001(b) is relevant. When they created the minimum timeframes, I can almost guarantee that CDCR was talking about 3000(b)(3), but did not elaborate further to distinguish between 3000(b)(2) and 3000(b)(3).

How is this response for my 602? It’s going to the california appeals office in Sacramento. Apparently this year they changed the procedures for a 602. There is actually a difference between the office of grievances and office of appeals.

I am dissatisfied with the response I was given because DAPO Policy NO 19-03 (amended) does not distinguish which penal codes apply for the 78 month timeframe. The California penal code only mentions the 78 month timeframe for the following penal codes 667.51, 667.61 and 667.71. The 3001 (c) states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, when any person referred to in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 3000 has been released on parole from the state prison, and has been on parole continuously for six years and six months since release from confinement, the board shall discharge, within 30 days, the person from parole, unless the board, for good cause, determines that the person will be retained on parole. The board shall make a written record of its determination and the department shall transmit a copy thereof to the parolee.” Also DAPO policy does not distinguish the difference between (3000)(b)(2) and 3000(b)(3) 10 year parole timeframes.
Also under DAPO Policy NO 19-03(amended) the Sex Offender management program Earned discharge criteria states that I may earn discharge from parole prior to the CDD. Parolee must complete a period of continuous active parole supervision, which I have completed a continuous active parole period for the duration of my parole term. I have completed all of the criteria listed on the DAPO Policy NO 19-03(amended). I have competed Sex Offender Treatment, pass all of my polygraphs and maintain a steady residency. DAPO Policy also states the definition of a Continuous Active parole is a period with no interruptions as a result of actions by BPH or the courts. I have no actions by the courts or the BPH to hinder my continuous active parole period.  

I think it is well-worded. Right now, DAPO has no current policy for 3000(b)(2) parolees. The only argument I could see them making is that because no early discharge terms are enumerated in Penal Code, then it would follow that none are to be given. However, this would be a constitutional violation of Equal Protection, as those covered in 667.51, et al are repeat offenders, and if early discharge provisions were provided for them, then it would follow that it would apply to 3000(b)(2) parolees as well. However, you clearly argue that it would be disproportionate to treat 3000(b)(2) and 3000(b)(3) parolees with the same earned discharge criteria.

The hope in this appeal is trying to get them to readjust policy to distinguish between 3000(b)(2) and 3000(b)(3) parolees.

Also, did they reset your next discharge review until 78 months in or did they set it for the end of this year (12 months from your last)?

Also, I do get what your saying about the timetable only being applicable to those in the CE/SE criteria. The way 19-03 is ordered, it makes it seem like PCR only updates Discharge Review Date when an offender is placed in the CE/SE category. Which would make sense, because if it is denied by the BPH, that would imply that specified time requirements were not met.

Because if your new Review Date was scheduled by Parole Case Records to be one year from now, that would imply that the SOMP minimum timeframe does not apply to you unless you are discharged by DAPO and not by the BPH (Category SE), and if this was the case, then I would think about changing your 602 to say that your US/DA are misinterpreting 19-03.

My discharge authority is DAPO. I have nothing to do with the BPH. I just think the memorandum is worded horrible and the structure is confusing. I still do not understand why I was issued a Discharge Review if I did not meet the eligible window for Discharge. Also I need to find out when is my next Discharge, if it is a year from my last review then the table doesn’t apply to me that’s the way I understand it. PCR staff is responsible for my Discharge review Date. I don’t know why Agents and Supervisor on so concern about my date apparently PCR staff knows something that no one else does.

I just think the staff here were I am parolee at doesn’t know what they are doing. I have read a couple of post here on this website of parolee receiving discharge from a 10 year parole.

I am going add to my 602 that the table seems like applies only for Category SE parolees. Any ideas if how I should word this in my 602?

Last edited 5 days ago by Dee From CA

It seems to me that the SOMP Earned Discharge Criteria is separate from the 78-month minimum timeframes. I think the US is only supposed to be sure that you surpass the Earned Discharge Criteria (which you have by completing treatment and having a 12-month period of continuous parole). If you’re discharge review is next year, then it’s safe to assume that they are misinterpreting the 19-03. The placement of the table in the CE/SE category means its only applicable to those in 3000(b)(3) and 3000(b)(4). Are you able to post the SOMP Earned Discharge Requirements specified in the memo?

I would definitely mention that the table is located in the CE/SE section, basically meaning that it is addressing those parolees who are still subject to BPH (3000(b)(3) and 3000(b)(4) are subject to BPH even if their crime was committed after July 13, 2013), and the table was not meant for 3000(b)(2) parolees such as yourself.

I would also ask about how PCR determines discharge review dates. I called and talked to my PO on Friday. My 3-year is next year. I just got onto maintenance yesterday. He consulted with the US and affirmed that I have a review next year and the US affirmed that I qualified. We will see though. Parole is very unorganized, and it seems like they could have hastily consulted the 19-03 in an attempt to prevent you from discharging. In fact, it seems like they found the 78-month thing after they denied you?

Below is the SOMP Earned Discharge Criteria. I copy and paste it straight from the memo. I honestly think they believe the 78 months pertains to all 10 year parolee. I think the 78 months deals with BPH parolee like you said. US, DA and office of grievances north region are misreading the memo. I am going to add that into my 602 that it only applies to 3000(b)(3) and 3000(b)(4). Thanks for the help

Sex Offender Management Program Earned Discharge Criteria 
Eligible parolees supervised under SOMP may also earn discharge from parole prior to the CDD. The parolee must complete a period of continuous active parole supervision as shown in the table below. Additionally, SOMP parolees shall meet the specified programming and criteria outlined in this section. 
To be eligible for EDC, SOMP parolees must meet all of the following criteria: 
-Complete a certified Sex Offender Treatment. Sex Offender Treatment is consideredcomplete when the treatment provider submits documentation to the parole agent that theparolee is in the “maintenance phase.”
-If a parolee’s requirement to complete Sex Offender Treatment is waived by the decisionof a containment team meeting, the requirement to complete Sex Offender Treatment is waived.
-Sex Offender Treatment is waived due to the parolee’s mental health, the parolee mustparticipate in a treatment program that addresses the parolee’s mental health diagnosis and the parolee can articulate resources for basic assistance if discharged from parole.Discharge prior to the CDD cannot be recommended unless the parolee’s mental health clinician recommends earned discharge.
-Complete a polygraph test, as instructed, with no deception found and no new disclosure admissions that the parolee has incurred in a technical violation of parole or a new law violation.
-Participate in Restorative Justice programming as directed by the AOR, if programming has been made available to the parolee.
-Maintain residential stability.
In addition to the requirements stated above, SOMP parolees must not have: 
-Any pending criminal cases.
-Any pending warrants or pending petitions.

For SOMP parolees, additional criteria listed under the CPSRM model additional criteria section might apply. The parole agent shall note the applicable criteria on the ROS. Additional criteria for SOMP cases is subject to US approval. Criteria not related to the parolee’s criminogenic needs or criminal history, or criteria that cannot be reasonably met prior to the CDD shall not be approved.

“ The parolee must complete a period of continuous active parole supervision as shown in the table below.”

Is there any further elaboration on what is ‘continuous active parole supervision’ and what table are they referring to?

Funny thing….. there is no table below. I think they mean bullet points. I notice that and I ask my agent about that and they don’t know. I think they type it wrong on the memorandum. Well me and you confirmed there is no penal code to define a continuous parole period for a 10 year parolee. I am still trying to find it in the penal code and they have everything else about other parolee but not us. I am hoping it means 36 months cause that would make sense because I was issued a 36 month discharge review. If there was a way to talk to someone at PCR about it.

Also I mailed my 602 today. I am crossing my fingers everything works out for me

Kindly keep us posted, on their response on your 602. I am at almost at the same situation as you. I was charged 288(A) and was given a 10-year parole and have been on parole since 2017. I was not given an early discharge review on my 3rd year and when I ask about it, my PO is saying that I have only the CDD of 2027, which is exactly 10 years. Im approaching my 5th year of continuous parole this year, and I have no violations, passed all polygraph exam, and I have been on Maintenance phase for almost a year now. Will I be eligible for either Earned discharge or Early discharge? Like you, I fall under 3000 (b)(2). How can I start the process of at least being considered for a discharge review? Any opinions from you or anyone will be greatly appreciated.

A lot of varied responses on this page, so I would take everything I say for granted as there are lots of inconsistencies. From what I’ve learned from other parolees and communication with my PO, discharge reviews often happen without the knowledge of the parolee. CCR (Title 15) declaures that the discharge review should be made accessible to you. At a minimum, where current policy stands, you should have one at the 6.5 year mark and every year thereafter. This is outlined in DAPO Policy 19-03.

Everything is about documentation. If there is no discharge review scheduled, I would file a Form 22 Request for Interview to document a date inquiry. After that, I would file a 602 arguing that you should have been issued a DRD (Discharge Review Date) by PCR (Parole Case Records). The 22 helps forms a basis for an appeal (as most appeals are moot/ineffective if you file after a certain timeframe).

Depending if your crime was committed before or after July 13, 2013 impacts your discharge authority. If it was before, your discharge authority is the BPH. If it was after, your discharge authority is DAPO. I would mention this in your 602 should you opt to file one. Legislation exists authorizing both entities to discharge you prior to your CDD. They are in PC 3000.

My county (medium/large sized) actually just started letting people onto maintenance late 2020, and we have seen a few people with 10-year parole get off earlier. A few at 6 and I know of one at 4 years.

Thank you John for your extensive response. So regarding the DAPO- Policy 19-03, the 6.5 mark is the time I could get a discharge review, and every year thereafter? For now, it won’t hurt to file Form-22 to inquire about my Discharge Review Date. By the way, my crime was committed after July 13, 2013 so my discharge authority is DAPO. Is it better to be under their discharge authority compared to the BPH?

John reponse is correct. You should ask about your discharge review date. Every Parolee has one. I am going to keep you guys posted on my 602.

Yes, will absolutely ask for my discharge review date. Thanks.

ALSO,

See if you can get a copy of the 1502-dr that should have been filled out on your behalf. Even if you are denied, the DOM articulates your right to have it.

dr = discharge review

Yup got denied by the DA. Apparently for not completing treatment. I’m literally on the last paper and have a polygraph next week. I’m gonna finish and appeal it. I will take all advice on how to go about it. Thanks!

Jake,

I wish you the best of luck. When you complete your last paper and pass your polygraph you should be on the maintenance phase next. When you complete the maintenance phase you should received a certification of completion of treatment. I am still awaiting on my appeal(602).

Good luck to you as well. So can I just go straight to a 602? Any advice on how to address it? Thanks

Jake,

My advice to you that you need to complete treatment. I did everything they told me to do and that’s how I address it. You have 60 days to send your 602.

Well I just finished the last paper and the lady said that’s all I need to do, not sure that’s actually true. I also am starting to get the feeling that maybe my PO just denied me and told me her recommended discharge. Because I asked him for a copy of the response so I could apeal it and all I got back was “geez really” and then when he saw me he didn’t have it. So I’m going into the office hopefully tomorrow to ask for it

Make sure you get the 1502 (discharge review) and make a copy of it and send it with your 602. They have to give you the your 1502 and a blank 602. Your parole office is suppose to mail the 602 to Sacramento appeals office …They should give a you 602 log number when they mail it.

I hate the fact that since my PO is acting weird about giving me that 1502, that I have such anxiety about pressing the issue to get it and face possible retaliation for something so simple. But I’m going to do it. Also, I just got home from a polygraph. I failed once again what a surprise. But I also may or may not have recorded the whole thing because this guy is super unprofessional. He literally told me he gets to say when I’m allowed to leave or not even though I signed a paper saying I could leave at any moment. Kind of curious am I allowed to share a recording of that? I mean he recorded it so am I in the right as well? I’m ready to get this guy out of the program. He fails everyone and the one time I had a different guy I passed just fine.

Thanks for the advice man it’s hard out here knowing what I can and can’t do but I don’t like being treated so badly

California is an all party consent state for recording private conversations. If I understand you correctly you recorded your conversation with this person without their consent then you can not use it. At least that is my opinion unless someone else knows more/better.

Okay new question how long can they hold onto that review and not give it to me? I’ve been trying to track it down and my PO seems to not care if I get it. Is there anything stating that they have a deadline to give us that review? Thanks

The deadline is in the DOM or Title 15. I am not sure where is it at. I would fill out a 602 for not giving it to you.

The deadline from what I read is ten days. I’m at least at about a month now and we were supposed to meet today and he said he won’t be back in the office until next Wednesday. This is just stupid

Hey if I have 60 days to appeal it, when does that start? Cause I just barely got a hold of my review where strange enough I learned my PO lied to me and recommended I be retained so that was cool. He also refused to tell me when my containment meeting was till it was too late and now I’m finally going to one in June to fight to be put on maintenance phase. They are fighting tooth and nail not to let me complete this stupid program

I would go to the office and file a form-22 requesting to ask for the 1502-dr that you are entitled to. That way it is documented.

Yea its pretty crazy I was actually surprised I complete treatment (all the assignments and pass maintenance phase) in less in three years. 60 days counter starts when you receive it but to be safe I would start the counter from the denied date on your discharge review

Everything is so sketchy here. So, it was dated 3-11-22. My PO lied and said it wouldn’t even be submitted till the end of March. So I didn’t find out until I was asking him about it in April and he just says I was denied. Then when I asked for a copy of the review he threw a fit and it took me up until a few days ago to get it. Which I didn’t sign for it because my wife had to pick it up cause I work all day and everytime we setup a time to get it he would have some excuse and he refused to leave it with another officer or bring it to me at a check in. So basically going off the review date I’m already passed the 60 days…

I would still submit it. Mention that you got the Discharge review on the date when received.

Last edited 21 hours ago by Dee From CA

While their are differences between Parole or Probation who is quick to judge today. Yes its shameful today that many are quick to judge another. There is always hope but with government today in many of these registry issues that are no more than a pride and a form of punishment are we all on probation. When its all said and done the courts could be just as wrong in this quick to judge.

I don’t like to comment on many things.Sure many of the thoughts and comments are good.whether right or wrong it is still true judgement that matters.Seems that many of you all have the right thought or comment or the quick fix but are we today inquiring diligently or is the plea deal the way to pass go and get off this registry. I should hope we all are inquiring diligently.

If today’s court of law made careful inquiry instead of trapping and entrapping another their would be a lot less people on this registry.

They cannot keep you on parole past your max release date unless the court specifically ordered more in your sentence. People do not understand this and it is hell and hoops of filing with parole but they CANNOT keep you on parole past your max sentence end date. They will if you let them just as they are giving people 85% for attempts 288(a)s when they are non violent and half time. No one fights it as I did to get their half time and just take it. FFFFF that….. I got mine and over 6 months early parole release. I did 2 year 5 month parole in CA. My max release date. Did not have to get permission or be granted it, it is the law.

I signed a plea for 5 in 2012. It states 5 years parole for PC 288(a).
When I paroled in 2014, I signed for 5 years. Then it changed to 20. Then back to 5. Then went to 10. I challenged the 10 to the case records in 2019 before my 5 year mark for 3000(b)(2)(a) because my crime was before 7-1-2013. Stating it was wrong. I was sent a denied response stating 3000-3007.5, PC 667.5, and the DOM section 81080.1.1. Nice. Section 81080.1.1 lays out the foundation for maximum parole @ 3-5 years maximum parole in the Parole and Revocation Periods chart for PC 667.5 violent felony at the bottom. There’s no (10, or not exceeding 10), which I have. Think I’ll challenge this through CDCR’s process to the courts with my plea showing 5 years and section 81080.1.1 showing CDCR’s 3-5 maximum parole. I believe in fighting fire with fire. Or should I say. Their fire. I probably should wait til my next review. But, I have 2 1/2 years to go out of 10. I also love wasting their time and money as they do mine. Lol

Last edited 2 days ago by SB
130
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.