Brown v. Kotek

“[A]lthough the court does not have a role in reviewing a governor’s exercise of discretion either to grant or revoke a conditional commutation, [the court] can review whether the revocation of plaintiff’s commutation exceeded the Governor’s authority under [the] circumstances.”

Plaintiff petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus after she was incarcerated due to an order by Governor Kotek revoking an earlier conditional commutation of one of plaintiff’s sentences. Former Governor Brown issued commutations of sentences in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic. Plaintiff’s sentence on one of her two charges was commuted from incarceration to post-prison supervision subject to a variety of conditions. The agreement stated it was revocable should plaintiff violate any post-prison supervision conditions. Plaintiff finished her post-prison supervision in February 2023. Plaintiff was arrested in February 2024 after a warrant was issued for her arrest pursuant to the order Governor Kotek issued in December 2023 revoking the commutation. “[A]lthough the court does not have a role in reviewing a governor’s exercise of discretion either to grant or revoke a conditional commutation, [the court] can review whether the revocation of plaintiff’s commutation exceeded the Governor’s authority under [the] circumstances.” The Court reasoned that Former Governor Brown incorporated the statutory and regulatory post-prison supervision framework by requiring in the agreement that plaintiff abide by the terms and conditions of any post-prison supervision imposed in connection with the commutation and judgment of conviction. Because the term of supervision ended before the revocation, the Court held Governor Kotek lacked the authority to revoke the commutation. The Court further held that violation proceedings must be initiated while the offender is under supervision, not after the term of supervision has ended and the offender is no longer subject to any sentence. The Court concluded the present imprisonment was unlawful and ordered plaintiff’s immediate discharge from custody.