Skip navigation
The Habeas Citebook: Prosecutorial Misconduct - Header
× You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.

Parole Rate Plummets in South Carolina

by Matt Clarke

Between 2018 and 2024, the parole rate in South Carolina dropped from around 40% to just 5%, an 80% decline. South Carolina is not alone in experiencing dramatic reductions in the rate at which prisoners are released from state prisons on parole. A Prison Policy Initiative survey of 27 states showed parole approval rates plummeted in 18 (67%) of them.

In South Carolina, the falling parole rate appears to be unrelated to the types of crimes the prisoners committed or the prisoners’ prison record, including attempts at rehabilitation. In other words, it is not related to whether the prisoners would actually be a threat to society if released on parole. Instead, the decline seems to be driven by the political, ideological, and professional backgrounds of the parole board members, all of whom were appointed by South Carolina’s Republican Governor Henry McMaster who, in 2016 as the state’s Attorney General, proposed abolishing parole altogether.

The sad truth about parole boards in most states is that the only requirement is appointment by the governor and perhaps confirmation by the state senate. Parole board members are not required to have a background, training, or education in psychology, sociology, criminal justice, or corrections—experience that would obviously make them better at what their job is supposed to be, i.e., determining whether releasing a particular prisoner on parole would pose an undue risk to society. Instead, the appointments tend to be a form of political patronage that includes prestige and a large salary.

In South Carolina, the parole board’s chair since 2019 is Kim Frederick. She has a background in victims services and voted for parole in only 41 of the 849 (4.8%) cases she reviewed between January and April 2024. Frank Widerman, a “philanthropist” and board member since 2021, had the lowest parole approval rate at just 3.8%. High school math teacher Reno Boyd approved 6.3% of the applications for parole he reviewed. Mollie DuPriest Taylor, a family lawyer, approved 6.5% while Henry Eldridge, whose background is in pharmaceuticals, approved around 8%. Geraldine Miro, an interim board member since 2022 who formerly worked in corrections, approved 9%. It is telling that the only person on the board who actually has a background that is relevant to its mission voted to grant parole more often than any other member.

“A majority of the members do not believe in parole,” said Cornell University law professor John Blume, who has represented men sentenced to life without parole as children before the board.

The very structure of the parole process is heavily weighted against the prisoner. Since 2023, parole lawyers are limited to 20 pages of supporting documentation while law enforcement can place an unlimited number of pages into the prisoner’s parole file. The system for correcting mistakes in the files is also deficient. Previously, prisoners applying for parole were not permitted to see their files. Due to a recent court order, they may review the files, but the board only gives them access to the file 30 minutes prior to the hearing. If mistakes are found, the request for correction must be made during the hearing—taking away from the as little as five minutes during which advocates may argue in favor of parole. Further, corrections are not even considered unless they are backed up with official records.

“Obviously, there’s no way to substantiate the official record when you’re at the prison at nine o’clock in the morning and your hearing is in 30 minutes,” said Allison Elder, executive director of Time Served, an organization that provides free representation for parole hearings to people incarcerated in South Carolina.

After 35 years and over 500 appearances before the board, Douglas Jennings stopped representing potential parolees in 2023, citing the difficulties in dealing with “the rejection board.”  

Source: boltsmag.org

As a digital subscriber to Criminal Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login

 

 

BCI - 90 Day Campaign - 1 for 1 Match
Advertise Here 4th Ad
The Habeas Citebook Ineffective Counsel Side