Skip to content
Name: In re Young
Case #: A131729
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 03/14/2012
Summary

When the Board of Parole Hearings denies release based on the inmate’s “lack of insight” due to incorrect factual findings and ignoring numerous suitability factors it is a denial of due process which requires remand for a new parole suitability hearing. In re Shaputis (2011) 53 Cal.4th 192 (Shaputis II) recently upheld the requirement that the Board must, consistent with due process, answer the essential question of whether the inmate currently poses a threat to public safety. In this case the Board found it “extraordinarily unusual” that Young remembered nothing about committing the crime. This was an inaccurate characterization when Young reported that he recalled hitting the victim only six times, but he now realized that it was many more times based on the forensic evidence. The Board found that he lacked insight and could recall more through thinking and praying about it. The Board found he lacked any insight into the causative factors that lead up to the second degree murder. The finding was not supported by the record and it disregarded the inmate’s description of an accumulation of factors. The matter was remanded for a hearing consistent with the opinion and In re Prather (2010) 50 Cal.4th 238.