On Tuesday, the Maryland Senate moved closer to eliminating the governor from the decision-making process when it comes to granting or refusing parole to lifers who don’t represent a threat to public safety due to their infirmity or ill health.
For those detained at the Patuxent Institution, the Patuxent Board of Review has the authority to suggest parole, and the Maryland Parole Commission has the authority to grant parole.
Approved 33–10, Senate Bill 132 would remove both the governor’s power to overrule the panels’ parole decisions and the requirement that the panels report their findings to the governor.
A person eligible for medical parole could be released from prison “at any time” while serving their sentence, according to the measure.
The commission may demand that the individual be put in a hospital, hospice, or other type of residence before releasing them.
The governor has 180 days under current law to reverse a medical parole decision.
The legislature gave its approval for the governor to be excluded from the parole procedure three years ago.
The medical parole bill’s sponsor, Sen. Jill P. Carter (D-Baltimore City), countered that leaving out the medical parole procedure in those modifications “was simply an oversight.” She pointed out that the state code’s medical parole laws were found in a separate part.
Two years ago, Carter was the sponsor of the medical parole legislation, but it never made it out of the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, which she currently serves on. Last year, the bill made it through the Senate but died in the House Judiciary Committee.
She stated on Tuesday that since the parole process law was passed, at least five people have passed away.
She remarked, “It’s really a tiny, significant change that could have a great impact on people who are dying.” “Those who think [those behind bars] who committed heinous crimes ought to stay there. The fact that we are footing the bill rather than allowing them to go and be at home with their family makes it a burden for all of us. Discussions regarding death with dignity are popular. That is the dignity of death.
However, one organization is against the governor being removed from this position, particularly to permit release “at any time” while serving a term.
According to a letter dated February 7th from the Maryland State’s Attorneys Association, individuals who are sentenced to life in prison for crimes like first-degree murder, first-degree rape, and first-degree child abuse resulting in the death of a child under the age of 13 should serve a substantial amount of time behind bars.
Patrick Gilbert, the senior assistant state’s attorney for Wicomico County, stated in a letter that “even if the offender no longer poses a threat to public safety.” “It is rightfully disliked that provisions allow elected executives to abstain from making such consequential decisions—the electorate ought to have a vote in how discretion is applied in these circumstances.”
The House of Delegates will now evaluate the Senate version.
The Judiciary Committee heard a hearing on the House bill that is identical and is sponsored by Del. J. Sandy Bartlett (D-Anne Arundel) on Tuesday. Bartlett is the committee’s vice chair.
Two years ago, the House approved Bartlett’s bill, but it never made it beyond the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. Last year, the bill remained in her committee.
She declared on Tuesday, “This is only for prisoners who are serving their sentences with the possibility of release.”
According to Bartlett, the bill does not confer any more rights or place a person in a better position than other inmates who may be eligible for parole.