Massachusetts parolees have scored a victory as the Suffolk County Superior Court recently ruled that a Parole Board decision to extend a man's 30-year parole can be challenged in court.
In the first decision of its kind, Judge Jackie Cowin denied the Parole Board’s effort to dismiss the case, saying the court has the jurisdiction to review the process of ending parole.
The state's Parole Board has been criticized for having an opaque process for terminating parole, leaving some people responsible to a parole officer for years or decades after they walk out of prison.
Plaintiff Khalid Mustafa has been part of the parole system since 1992, when he left prison after serving a 15-year sentence for second degree murder. That means he’s checked in with a rotating cast of parole officers at least once a month, pays $80 monthly in supervision fees, and also provides proof of employment and a urine sample for drug testing.
A 1955 statute says that after a year, the Parole Board can terminate a former prisoner's parole if it’s in the public interest. They haven’t done it often. A public records request from GBH News to the Parole Board found only five termination requests have been approved between 2014 to early 2022. Only 65 people had applied — a low number attorneys say is a result of an unclear process.
As of 2020, there were 1,683 people on parole in Massachusetts.
The Parole Board denied Mustafa's request to terminate his parole in 2021, despite recommendations from his employers, his counselor, former corrections officials, state legislators and parole officer Salvador Bolanos that he should be released form parole. There was no explanation for the denial, according to a document GBH News reviewed. When Mustafa asked the board how to appeal, he learned there was no appeal process. That's when he filed suit.
The court's ruling is “really a win for those who come after me,” said Mustafa in a phone interview, because it creates some process of oversight of the Parole Board's decisions. “Hopefully they won't have to go through this whole process. And I hope the final decision will be something that benefits those who come after me.”
Mustafa’s attorney Jeffrey Harris said this is a precedent setting win. “It means that going forward, people who have had their parole terminations denied by the parole board can ask the court to review that decision,” he said. The court will next hold a hearing to decide whether the parole board abused its discretion in the matter, and look at the facts of Mustafa’s case.
“They're going to look at how meritorious is Khalid's argument that he should have his parole terminated,” said Harris.
The parole board told GBH News it can’t comment on active litigation.
“I've done all the things that I can do on a personal and professional level of development,” said Mustafa about why he’s earned the parole termination. “Even, you know, surviving, 30 years on parole without a termination is really a feat in itself too — there are so many technical violations it's very hard to really just successfully navigate that.”
Mustafa took classes at Roxbury Community College as a member of the Timothy Smith Network, a foundation that helps provide technology resources to Boston residents, and worked for the organization until recently. He was an adjunct professor at Bunker Hill Community College, and is currently studying for a master’s degree in community development policy and practice through the University of New Hampshire.
Mustafa is also involved in a group suit in another court over how Massachusetts terminates parole; that case is on hold as the board creates new proposed regulations, which are expected to be released in August.
Plaintiffs in that case are seeking a clear process for terminating parole, with benchmarks for getting approval and requiring specific reasons for denial.
