Mason v. Hobbs

Summary

The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed dismissal of Gary J. Mason’s petition for declaratory judgment and writ of mandamus concerning his parole eligibility. The court held that Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-93-611 required Mason to serve seventy percent of his rape sentence before parole eligibility, and that the Arkansas Department of Correction, rather than the sentencing court, determines parole eligibility. The court further concluded that the statute’s application did not violate due process, modify Mason’s sentence, or require a trial court order.

Holdings

1. Mason was not entitled to declaratory judgment because he failed to establish the statutory and justiciability requirements for declaratory relief.
2. Mason was not entitled to a writ of mandamus because he failed to establish an enforceable right to the requested relief or a clear and certain right requiring performance of a nondiscretionary duty.
3. Application of the statute did not violate due process because there is no constitutional right or entitlement to parole.
4. Determining parole eligibility is within the authority of the ADC, not the sentencing court, and the ADC's determination does not modify the prison sentence.
5. The ADC properly applied section 16-93-611(a)(1), as in effect when Mason committed the offense, even though the judgment did not cite the statute.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Mason was entitled to declaratory relief concerning application of Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-93-611(a)(1) to his rape sentence.
2. Whether the ADC's application of the seventy-percent parole-eligibility requirement unlawfully modified Mason's sentence or constituted a sentence enhancement without a court order.
3. Whether application of the parole-eligibility statute without notice violated due process.
4. Whether the ADC lacked authority to determine parole eligibility because the judgment did not cite the statute.
5. Whether Mason was entitled to a writ of mandamus compelling relief concerning his parole eligibility.

Disposition

affirmed