July 31, 2006
Colorado Supreme Court on parolee disenfranchisement
Though the Sentencing Project here provides comprehensive coverage of felony disenfranchisement issues, this post at TalkLeft spotlighted an interesting new ruling on parolee voting rights from Colorado. Here is the Colorado Supreme Court's own summary of its ruling in Danielson v. Dennis, No. 06SA174 (Colo. July 31, 2006) (available here):
The Colorado Supreme Court holds that the General Assembly did not violate article VII, section 10 of the Colorado Constitution by enacting a law that prevents a person who has been convicted of a felony and is serving a sentence of parole from voting or registering to vote. The intent of the constitutional phrase "full term of imprisonment" in article VII, section 10 is to restore an incarcerated person's full rights upon completion of the entire duration of his or her sentence, or upon a pardon from the Governor. A person who is serving a sentence of parole has not served his or her full term of imprisonment within the meaning of this constitutional provision. Appellants have not borne their burden of clearly demonstrating that section 12103( 4), C.R.S. (2005), is unconstitutional.
July 31, 2006 at 12:15 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Colorado Supreme Court on parolee disenfranchisement:
Hello professor, I am a parolee from Illinois. Do you know of any Supreme Court decision relating to Mandatory Supervised Release (parole)? I am currently involved in a suit against Illinois and their Department of Corrections regarding their interpretation of Illinois' MSR statute. I saw a TV news prompt in which I believe the US Supreme Court made a decision on a Colorado(?) case and could use some help finding this case if in fact it does exist. I would appreciate any assistance you could provide. thank you.
Posted by: Aaron Haun | Aug 12, 2006 2:01:47 PM