Opinion

Massachusetts Parole Board v. Brusgulis

  • 403 Mass. 1010
  • 532 N.E.2d 45
  • 1989 Mass. LEXIS 4
Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Filed
Jan 5, 1989
Status
Published
Cited by
8 cases
Authority
More cited than 74.6%

same, in petition by parole board

How later courts described this case

  • same, in petition by parole board

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

T his complaint by the Massachusetts Parole Board pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3 (1986 ed.), is before us on reservation and report by a single *1011 justice of this court. The case, involving the propriety of a grant of habeas corpus relief by the Superior Court which restored Richard Brusgulis to the parole status he enjoyed prior to revocation of his parole on the basis of a criminal indictment against him, is rendered moot by the subsequent revocation of parole based on new and separate indictments. We note, however, that since parole constitutes a variation on imprisonment, Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 477 (1972), and not an unrestrained release from confinement, a grant of declaratory relief rather than a writ of habeas corpus is the appropriate remedy to be sought or granted where the revocation of parole is challenged. See Pina v. Superintendent, Mass. Correctional Inst., Walpole, 376 Mass. 659, 664 (1978).

Francis X. Bellotti, Attorney General, Frederick W. Riley, Barbara A. H. Smith & Andrew M. Zaikis, Assistant Attorneys General, for the plaintiff, submitted a brief.

The case is remanded to the county court for the entry of an- order dismissing the complaint.

So ordered.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.