The web Browser you are currently using is unsupported, and some features of this site may not work as intended. Please update to a modern browser such as Chrome, Firefox or Edge to experience all features Michigan.gov has to offer.
Granholm Signs Legislation to Help Keep Michigan Safe
July 20, 2006
July 20, 2006
LANSING – Governor Jennifer M. Granholm has signed legislation that reinforces tough, new policies that will make Michigan’s parole process stronger and more accountable. The policies were put in place by the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) at the Governor’s direction to ensure that parole violators remain in prison until a fact-finding hearing can be held.
“This legislation reinforces our current efforts to keep dangerous criminals off the street,” Granholm said. “The Department of Corrections has taken decisive actions to strengthen the parole process. I’m pleased to sign legislation that ensures that state law reflects those changes.”
State law requires that prisoners held on parole violations are entitled to a fact-finding hearing on the parole violation within 45 days. Public Act 315 of 2006 (Senate Bill 1196) requires that the MDOC director or deputy director be notified in writing in the event an imprisoned parole violator does not receive a fact-finding hearing within 45 days. The bill also stipulates that a hearing be held as soon as possible when this occurs.
Public Act 316 of 2006 (House Bill 5967) specifies that the parole violator remain in prison until a hearing is held, even if the hearing is held after the 45-day mark.
The actions by the MDOC came in the wake of the discovery that a violent felon had been released from prison as the result of confusion over policies relating to whether or not a parole violator could be held in prison after 45 days without a hearing.
Actions taken by the MDOC include:
• disciplinary action taken against employees including line staff, supervisors and upper management personnel including the dismissal of the manager responsible for the day-today operations of the parole supervision and revocation process;
• the dismantling of the Parole Supervision Unit, which was responsible for processing parole violations and revocations; and,
• statewide training in the new procedures and policies set forth by the department.