Walker v. Board of Pardons

Utah Supreme Court

Walker v. Board of Pardons

803 P.2d 1241, 150 Utah Adv. Rep. 10, 1990 Utah LEXIS 109, 1990 WL 218520

CourtUtah Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 27, 1990

DocketNo. 900113

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 803 P.2d 1241 (Walker v. Board of Pardons) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Utah Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Walker v. Board of Pardons, 803 P.2d 1241, 150 Utah Adv. Rep. 10, 1990 Utah LEXIS 109, 1990 WL 218520 (Utah 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from an order dismissing plaintiff Monty Kent Walker’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Walker contended that his parole was revoked for alleged criminal conduct without arrest, filing of formal charges, and trial and that, had he been charged and tried, he would have been found not guilty. Walker claims that his constitutional right to face his accusers and to be tried before a jury of his peers was violated.

The rationale of Johns v. Shulsen, 717 P.2d 1336 (Utah 1986), governs the disposition of the case under review:

Parole revocation is an administrative proceeding and not a criminal prosecution. It stems from a clear violation of the rules and regulations imposed as a condition of parole. Invariably, freedom from criminal activity is a condition of parole; however, a conviction is not a prerequisite.

Id. at 1338 (citing Ward v. Smith, 573 P.2d 781 (Utah 1978)).

The burden of proof in a criminal proceeding is beyond a reasonable doubt. Johns v. Shulsen, 717 P.2d at 1338. In an administrative proceeding, it is by a preponderance of the evidence. Id. The findings of the Board of Pardons disclose sufficient evidence from which it could have found that Walker committed the offense with which he was charged and that he therefore breached one of the conditions of his parole not to violate any state laws. Walker’s constitutional argument is therefore without merit.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from an order dismissing plaintiff Monty Kent Walker’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Walker contended that his parole was revoked for alleged criminal conduct without arrest, filing of formal charges, and trial and that, had he been charged and tried, he would have been found not guilty. Walker claims that his constitutional right to face his accusers and to be tried before a jury of his peers was violated.

The rationale of Johns v. Shulsen, 717 P.2d 1336 (Utah 1986), governs the disposition of the case under review:

Parole revocation is an administrative proceeding and not a criminal prosecution. It stems from a clear violation of the rules and regulations imposed as a condition of parole. Invariably, freedom from criminal activity is a condition of parole; however, a conviction is not a prerequisite.

Id. at 1338 (citing Ward v. Smith, 573 P.2d 781 (Utah 1978)).

The burden of proof in a criminal proceeding is beyond a reasonable doubt. Johns v. Shulsen, 717 P.2d at 1338. In an administrative proceeding, it is by a preponderance of the evidence. Id. The findings of the Board of Pardons disclose sufficient evidence from which it could have found that Walker committed the offense with which he was charged and that he therefore breached one of the conditions of his parole not to violate any state laws. Walker’s constitutional argument is therefore without merit.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

803 P.2d 1241, 150 Utah Adv. Rep. 10, 1990 Utah LEXIS 109, 1990 WL 218520, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walker-v-board-of-pardons-utah-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack