Cardozo Law Review
Abstract
The majority of carceral sentences in the United States include the possibility of discretionary release on parole. Most such sentences, however, are unconstitutionally vague. Their unconstitutionality has gone unnoticed because contemporary scholarship and litigation about vague laws have focused on the U.S. Constitution in lieu of state constitutions. This Article unearths historic state court decisions holding that sentences that end through the discretionary judgment of a parole board are “void for uncertainty.” Although state void for uncertainty doctrines share some similarity with the federal vagueness doctrine, they are far more demanding as applied to criminal punishment. By urging revival of the void for uncertainty doctrine, this Article outlines a novel path for state constitutional litigation and proposes how state legislatures can reform parole statutes to put them on sound constitutional footing.
Keywords
Jurisprudence, Statutes, Legislation, Constitutional Law, Immigration Law
Disciplines
Constitutional Law | Immigration Law | Jurisprudence | Law | Legislation
Recommended Citation
Kristen Bell,
The Forgotten Jurisprudence of Parole and State Constitutional Doctrines of Vagueness,
44
Cardozo L. Rev.
1953
(2023).
Available at:
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/clr/vol44/iss5/6
Included in
Constitutional Law Commons, Immigration Law Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, Legislation Commons
