Ray v. Carthen

Summary

The Georgia Supreme Court held that the State Board of Pardons and Paroles’ notice assigning an inmate a tentative parole month was not premature consideration for parole under OCGA § 42-9-45(b). Because the timing of parole consideration involved the Board’s discretion, mandamus was inappropriate, and the trial court’s judgment was reversed.

Holdings

1. The Board's Notice of Tentative Action was not premature consideration for parole because applying the parole guidelines to determine a tentative parole month is not itself consideration for parole under OCGA § 42-9-45(b).
2. Mandamus was inappropriate because Carthen could not show a clear legal duty requiring the Board to consider him for parole immediately upon statutory eligibility, and the timing of consideration was within the Board's discretion.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Board's notice assigning a tentative parole month constituted premature consideration for parole before Carthen became eligible under OCGA § 42-9-45(b).
2. Whether mandamus was an appropriate remedy to compel the Board to consider Carthen for parole within 45 days.

Disposition

reversed