James Randall Smith
Attorney at Law
1201 South Shepherd
Houston, TX 77019
Telephone
713/630-0500
Web Page
www.texasparole.com
Facsimile
713/630-0553

August 1, 2005

Thank you for writing to me. This letter is written in an effort to continue to keep you updated on the current issues regarding parole and parole related issues, as well as to address some of the repetitive questions asked in the letters I receive from the inmate population.

On May 20, 2005, I was privileged to host the Ray Hill Prison Show on Pacifica Radio. Mr. Hill was not on the air that night because he was being honored by being roasted for his years of civic activity by a charitable organization. The Ray Hill Prison Show is broadcast every Friday night at 9:00 p.m. at 90.1 FM Pacifica Radio, and it is also on the Web at KPFT.org. for those who live outside of the Houston area. The following includes most of the information I talked about for individuals listening to the show:

PAROLE BOARDS AND THEIR MEMBERS:

AMARILLO BOARD ANGLETON BOARD GATESVILLE BOARD HUNTSVILLE BOARD PALESTINE BOARD
Charles Aycock Linda Garcia Juanita Gonzalez Rissie Owens Jackie Denoyelles
James Poland Lynn Ruzicka Alvin Shaw Elvis Hightower Pamela Freeman
Charles Shipman Howard Thrasher(new) Gerald Garrett Paul Kiel (two days) Tommy Fordyce (new)

SAN ANTONIO BOARD
Jose Aliseda
Paddy Burwell
Charles Speier

PAROLE APPROVAL RATES:
(Month to month voting percentage of the 6 Boards combined.)

Release Rates for February 2005:
Aggravated, but no sex offense 17.99%
Aggravated Sex Offense 16.20%
Violent, but not aggravated no sex 17.16%
Not aggravated but a sex offense 11.23%
Nonviolent no sex offense 31.96%
Total Parole vote (year to date) 26.12%
Release Rates for March 2005:
Aggravated, but no sex offense 21.15%
Aggravated Sex Offense 18.35%
Violent, but not aggravated no sex 17.79%
Not aggravated but a sex offense 13.17%
Nonviolent no sex offense 35.41%
Total Parole vote (year to date) 28.72%
Release Rates for April 2005:
Aggravated, but no sex offense 20.12%
Aggravated Sex Offense 14.05%
Violent, but not aggravated no sex 15.78%
Not aggravated but a sex offense 09.52%
Nonviolent no sex offense 30.78%
Total Parole vote (year to date) 25.46%
Release Rates for May 2005:
Aggravated, but no sex offense 20.70%
Aggravated Sex Offense 10.47%
Violent, but not aggravated no sex 20.93%
Not aggravated but a sex offense 12.17%
Nonviolent no sex offense 30.72%
Total Parole vote (year to date) 26.50%

In my view, the percentages reflect a downward spiraling trend developing in the voting patterns of the Parole Board Members. The Board is slowly drifting to a lower release rate. Although one month may occasionally have a higher release rate, the overall voting pattern for release is spiraling downward. I anticipate the overall release rate will level out between a high of 25% and a low of 20%. The downward spiral is continuing even though prison overcrowding is increasing with each passing month. To stop a rumor consistently appearing in the letters from inmates writing to me, please be informed: every Parole Board Member has informed me they are not and will not be releasing inmates just to reduce the prison population. Governor Perry proposed, and the Texas Legislature passed funding to house inmates in private and county facilities. Presently there are over 8,000 empty beds in county and private institutions ready to accept inmates. I already have one client being housed in a private facility in Groesbeck, Texas.

79th LEGISLATURE:
HB 129: Relating to the authority to require a convicted person to perform manual labor for non-profit organization; Sent to Governor who presently has not vetoed or signed into law.
HB 291: Relating to victim notification regarding the release of certain defendants following acquittal by reason of insanity; Effective 9/1/05.
HB 448: Relating to prison in geriatric community; Died in subcommittee.
HB 550: Relating to the right of a defendant to read his pre-sentence report at least 48-hours prior to sentencing; Effective 9/01/05.
HB 575: Relating to the operation of community supervision and correction departments and the early release of a defendant from community supervision; Died in committee.
HB 867: Relating to the registration and supervision of sex-offenders and to state assistance to sex-offenders attaches penalties; Effective 9/01/05.
HB 1095: Making it a crime for an inmate to cause a public servant to contact bodily fluids or excrement and any illness derived from such action shall be admitted into the court; Effective 9/01/05.
HB 1365: Relating to telephones per inmates; Withdrawn from schedule; This is not law.
HB 1421: Relating to restoring good time forfeited during imprisonment; Died in committee.
HB 1423: Relating to duration of the placement of an inmate in administrative segregation; Died in committee.
HB 1529: Relating to the provision of in-cell education of an inmate confined in administrative segregation; Pending in committee - not law.
HB 1530: Relating to the provision of telephone service to inmates and defendants confined in facilities operated by TDCJ; Died in committee;
HB 1661: Relating to a person filed on for parole revocation for an administrative violation being allowed bond; Died in committee.
HB 1681: Relating to the imposition of sanctions on an inmate who refuses to cooperate in the taking of a sample or specimen to create a DNA record; Sent to Governor.
HB 1858: Relating to prosecution and treatment of certain sex-offenders requiring a treatment program be set up in TDCJ; Died in committee.
HB 1896: Relating to the application of law awarding credit to an inmate between subsequent release on parole, mandatory supervision; Vetoed by the Governor.
HB 1916: Relating to the restoration of rights such as right to vote, serving as a petit juror, and other rights if the defendant has served one-third of probation or two years, whichever is less; Died in committee.
HB 1917: Relating to the a procedure to terminate or reduce a term of community supervision imposed upon a criminal defendant; Withdrawn from schedule.
HB 1920: Relating to the gradual imposition of sanctions upon the defendant who violates conditions of community supervision; Withdrawn from schedule.
HB 2036: Sets up a licensing procedure for sex-offender treatment programs; Sent to Governor, has not signed or vetoed.
HB 2036: Relating to the prohibition of wireless communication inside a penal institution; Sent to Governor.
HB 2193: Relating to the giving of time credit to a defendant who has been placed in a court ordered residential program; Vetoed by the Governor.
HB 2197: Relating to the public disclosure of photographs and other information of inmates confined in TDCJ; Sent to the Governor.
HB 2837: Relating to insuring educational and vocational programs relate to subsequent employment; Sent to the Governor.
HB 2838: Relating to a prison diversion pilot program; left pending in committee.
HB 2904: Relating to the eligibility of certain inmates of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for medically recommended intensive supervision; Died in committee.
HB 3217: Relating to an assault on an inmate by an employee of TDCJ must be reported to the proper authority in the county where the assault occurred; Left pending in committee.
SB 695: Relating to the forfeiture of good-time, conduct time from inmates who file frivolous applications for writ of habeas corpus; Left pending in committee - sent to Governor.
SB 912: Relating to the civil commitment and the protection of the public by violent sexual predators; Effective 9/1/05.

Special DWI Legislation:

HB 51: Relating to the punishment prescribed for and conditions of community supervision imposed on certain persons who commit intoxication offenses. If a person convicted of an intoxication offense is placed on community supervision, the court may require as a condition that the defendant have a deep-lung breath analysis device installed on the motor vehicle owned by the defendant or regularly driven to determine if the driver has consumed any alcoholic beverage prior to driving the automobile if the individual is on bond and charged with DWI and the blood, breath, or urine specimen showed alcohol concentration level of 0.15 or greater, and the state can use DWI cases older than 10-years to enhance a new DWI arrest;
HB 157:

A mandatory 72-hours of continuous confinement if convicted;

HB 904: Adds intoxicated assault to a list of stackable offenses;
HB 2275: Allows forfeiture of vehicle in a felony DWI conviction.

I have attempted to locate and supply the inmate population with a brief synopsis of the legislation that will affect the inmate population and that has been proposed but died in committee, subsequently passed out of committee, may become law or is presently pending before the governor of the state of Texas. If I missed any particular legislation you have been following,,I am sorry, but as you can see by the number of the bills listed, there has been over 4,000 separate bills filed in the 79th Legislature. With very few exceptions, if the Legislature or the governor could make life more difficult for the inmate, the law passed; and, if there was any legislation which could assist the inmate in being reintegrated back into society, most of the legislation failed to become law.

WHY SHOULD AN INMATE CONSIDER HIRING AN ATTORNEY FOR PAROLE ASSISTANCE:
In the 11-years I have been representing inmates before the Parole Board, I have discovered that inmates and their families creating their own parole packages do not include evidence which could convince the Parole Board why they should release a particular individual from prison; or, they totally disregard the evidence and insist on arguing a position which is not backed up by facts.

The Parole Board does not retry an inmate's case. That is not to say that certain evidence could show the inmate was not an active participant of the crime, or the crime was not as heinous as it appears to be. Most individuals are not familiar with the Parole Board and attempt to make the evidence fit their theory of the case instead of allowing the evidence to lead them to a conclusion. If an inmate or the family members are not capable of objectively following the evidence to its logical conclusion and arguing from that evidence, then I believe representation by an attorney would be preferable.

Another problem with an inmate representing himself/herself or a family member representing an inmate, is the inability of the inmate or the family member to openly communicate and truthfully discuss the negative aspects of the inmate's file. On many occasions I have seen the inmate or his/her family members argue that the inmate was not an active participant in the crime, but instead was merely an observer who happened to be caught at the scene. Quite often, this can fly in the face of numerous witness statements, police reports, or trial testimony. When this occurs, the inmate or his/her family members lose all credibility, and the Parole Board generally denies parole. Obviously, a good parole attorney, who has maintained his/her credibility with the Parole Board will have an advantage when presenting documented information and/or arguing in the inmate's behalf to the Board. A good attorney will research every aspect of the case, the client's life, both in and out of prison, and based upon the evidence he/she has accumulated be able to present a strong, persuasive argument as to why his/her client should be released to parole. If he/she has followed the trail of evidence and has tailored his/her argument to conform to the evidence as to why the inmate should to be released to parole, the chances of the inmate receiving a favorable vote are greatly increased because of the attorney's credibility with the Parole Board Members and Commissioners.

Most family members do not understand that the Parole Board is made up of human beings and they, like anyone else, perceive certain information in a certain way. The easiest way to explain this is to understand the following: the Parole Board is the only entity available to release an inmate to parole. If the board believes an inmate has a particular problem and that particular problem has not been addressed, there is a strong probability the Parole Board will not release the inmate to parole. I often recommend that inmates take certain courses or follow certain courses of action even though there may not be any material facts contained within the file to cause the Parole Board to believe these actions are necessary. The cumulative evidence in an inmate's file might cause the Board to perceive the inmate has a need for a particular course of rehabilitation. For example, an inmate might need to participate in drug treatment/counseling, although he/she has never been arrested for any drug offense or even used drugs.

I also recommend that an attorney be hired if the family is incapable of writing a short story about the inmate which will grab the Parole Board Members' attention and cause them to want to read further about the inmate's life and aspirations. On average, the Parole Board votes on a file in less than four minutes. It is important to grab the Parole Board Members attention and cause them to desire to read further into the file. When I represent an inmate, I submit a parole assistance package to the Parole Board, they read it and then I am almost always granted about 30 to 45 minutes of the first voting member's time to argue in my client's behalf.

An inmate and his/her family should expect an attorney to diligently investigate every fact situation and follow the facts to a logical conclusion. The attorney should gather all the necessary facts, organize and design a parole package, and submit same to the Parole Board in a timely manner. Doing so will help the Parole Board understand the inmate's prior life, present prison life, the overall situation, and future goals. The package should be a means by which the inmate can communicate to the Parole Board. The attorney should request an appearance before the first voting board member. The inmate and his family should receive a copy of the parole package submitted to the parole panel. Finally, the inmate should be informed of the decision by the Parole Board whether it is favorable or not. If an attorney, or someone assisting the family, is not willing to do these things, then I would strongly recommend seeking assistance elsewhere.

ATTORNEY PRESENTATION:
One of the first things that an inmate or his/her family should know is that all documentation contained within an inmate's file is negative. Part of what I do, is present a person to the Board, instead of just another TDCJ number that represents one more convicted felon(s) who is eligible for parole. The Parole Board generally spends approximately 2 - 3 minutes deciding whether to release and inmate to parole or not. I must get the Board's attention, hold their attention and present a human being to them, who although convicted of a crime or crimes is a good candidate for release to parole and why.

Although I do not have any facts about the tasks performed by other attorneys representing inmates, I can explain to you some of the tasks I perform which may be part of why my fees are sometimes higher than other attorneys. I conduct a thorough investigation of the inmate's life and gather any and all documented facts, among other things. Initially, a questionnaire exceeding 100 questions is sent out to each client, the trial attorney is contacted if possible, court documents are gathered, medical records and psychological reports are gathered, TDCJ records such as minute sheets, time sheets, disciplinary records, etc. are gathered, trial transcripts are purchased, appellate briefs and any and all other such documentation is gathered, read and analyzed. Upon completion of the investigative stage, a personalized package for each client is then prepared and submitted to the Board along with a request to appear before the Board to argue in my client's behalf. Also, when I am hired well in advance, I am able to work with the inmate to assist him/her in preparing himself/herself to be as favorably viewed as possible. As you can see, there is an extraordinary amount of work involved to meet the standards and requirements I have set for myself in thoroughly representing an inmate and it is a very time consuming and work intensive job. Time is always of the essence and the more time I have to perform the tasks at hand by being hired well in advance of the inmate's eligibility date, the better for my client. Every inmate is eventually going to be reviewed by the Board. If I am hired well in advance of an inmate's eligibility date, I will have the needed time frame within which to help prepare an inmate to be a good candidate for release to parole, to gather the needed information and prepare the written documentation to be submitted to the Board, and to argue in behalf of my client before the Board if granted an appearance.

SUCCESS RATE:
Documenting every aspect of my client's life, his/her accomplishments, his/her rehabilitation, as well as many other factors, along with the credibility I have built with the Board Members, are some of the reasons I have been able to maintain an 80% + release rate for my clients over the many years I have represented inmates before the Board. Although some of my parole assistance files do not pose extraordinary challenges, the greater portion of them are very challenging and require me and my staff to go the extra mile to accomplish the mutual objective of the inmate's receiving the privilege of release to parole. A few examples of some my release successes in 2005 are: (1) Possession of 5 kilos cocaine, first review - FI-1; (2) Involuntary Manslaughter - FI-6; (3) Possession of cocaine, life sentence - FI-1; (4) Possession of Heroin, 35 years - FI-6; (5) Aggravated Robbery, 10 years - FI-1; (6) Sexual Assault, 10 years, SB-45, first review - FI-18R.

DO NOT WAIT TO HIRE PAROLE ASSISTANCE ATTORNEY:
Every day inmates and their families contact me for parole assistance, but it is too late for me to be able to do anything. Why? They've waited until the inmate's file is already in review status or just before. That's too late. An inmate's file goes into review status at least 4 months prior to the eligibility date. Most files will be voted on prior to the actual eligibility date. A lot of work must be done BEFORE review status. It takes a minimum of 3 months prior to the 4 - 6 month review status stage of an inmate's file to investigate, gather documentation and produce a worthwhile parole assistance package. So if you decide to obtain my services to prepare a parole assistance package, do so far in advance of your review status and parole eligibility date. Set-offs can be as long as 5 years and 5 year set-offs are not uncommon these days. Once a set-off is received, there is no appeal from the Parole Board's decision and a special review is more than difficult to even qualify for much less obtain.

Time payment plan: If you decide to hire me and do so well in advance of your eligibility date, I can design a time payment plan for your family or loved ones, but I must be paid in full before I submit the parole package or request an appearance before the Parole Board to argue for an inmate's release to parole. The time payment plan has been very helpful to many of my clients who have limited financial resources and thereby allowed them to hire me without causing them financial distress because they have hired me many months or even years in advance. If you wait until the last minute, the entire fee is going to be due immediately.

WHO CAN REPRESENT INMATES:
I would like to state there are some individuals who are preying upon inmates and their families offering parole assistance who are not licensed attorneys. For your protection as well as your family members or loved one(s) please be informed, if you are considering hiring anyone other than a licensed attorney to assist you, take heed that the law requires under Govt. Code 508.083 (a) A person who represents inmates for compensation must: (1) be a licensed attorney licensed in this state; and (2) register with the division.

Please do not send any of your documentation to me prior to retaining me. On numerous occasions, inmates who have not retained my services have sent documentation to me requesting that I review it. I am sorry to say that I cannot perform that type of free service. I am contractually obligated to spend my time working on the files of paying clients. Also, I cannot and will not be responsible for such documentation, nor can I afford to pay postage cost to return it, therefore it must be destroyed. So please, unless I am your retained attorney, do not send any of your documentation to this office.

Again, thank you for writing to me. I hope I have answered some of your questions and also updated you on some of the current parole related issues. Whatever your decision may be, I wish you the very best of luck. Remember, now is the time to prepare for your possible release to parole.

Sincerely,

James Randall Smith
Attorney at Law