Robert C. Daniels v. Charles Traughber, Tennessee Board of Paroles - Concurring

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE

ROBERT C. DANIELS, ) ) Plaintiff/Appellant, ) Appeal No. ) 01-A-01-9707-CH-00297 ) VS. ) Davidson Chancery ) No. 96-1814-III ) CHARLES TRAUGHBER, Chairman, TENNESSEE BOARD OF PAROLES, ET AL., ) ) ) FILED ) Defendants/Appellees. ) May 6, 1998

Cecil W. Crowson Appellate Court Clerk CONCURRING OPINION

I concur with the decision to affirm the trial court’s order. In my view, it

is simply a case of statutory application. In the “Open Parole Hearings Act” of 1993

the legislature provided that the Parole Board shall receive and consider victim impact

statements, Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-28-504(a); that notice be given to the victim or the

victim’s representative and to the trial judge and district attorney involved in the

original criminal prosecution, Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-28-505(b)(1), (2) and (4); and that

on a failure to provide the required notices, the Board may schedule a new hearing

if the Board receives a written victim impact statement within fifteen days of the time

the parole decision is finalized, Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-28-505(d)(2).

The facts of this case fit the statute almost perfectly. I believe the Board

was justified in scheduling the second hearing and in considering the feelings of the

victim’s family. I believe that is what the legislature intended for the Board to do.

_________________________________ BEN H. CANTRELL, JUDGE