Barry Slakman v. State Board of Pardons and Paroles
21-12226
| 11th Cir. | Nov 2, 2021Background
- Barry Slakman murdered his wife in 1993, was convicted in 2001, and is serving life with parole eligibility.
- In 2006 Georgia amended O.C.G.A. §17-10-6.1(c)(1) to impose a 30-year minimum before parole for certain first serious violent felonies; Slakman says this changed parole practice.
- Slakman’s parole applications have been periodically considered and denied; the Parole Board’s 2020 denial stated his parole eligibility "remains intact" and his case would be reconsidered in August 2023.
- Slakman sued the Georgia State Board of Pardons & Paroles and its chairman under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging an Ex Post Facto violation and an Equal Protection violation.
- The district court dismissed the complaint (Board immune under Eleventh Amendment; claim against chairman time-barred) and found on the merits that Slakman failed to plead an Ex Post Facto or equal protection violation; the Eleventh Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ex Post Facto | Slakman: 2006 law retroactively altered parole eligibility (30-year minimum) | Board/Barnard: 30-year rule was not applied to him; he remained eligible and only parole grants are discretionary | No Ex Post Facto violation; plaintiff failed to show the statute was applied to him |
| Equal Protection | Slakman: treated differently than similarly situated life-sentence inmates who were paroled sooner | Board/Barnard: comparators not shown to be identical; parole decisions consider many factors | Failed to state a class-of-one claim; comparators not prima facie identical |
| Procedural (immunity/statute) | Slakman: pursued claims against Board and chairman | Defendants: Board entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity; claim against chairman time-barred | Board dismissed on immunity grounds; court nonetheless addressed merits as to chairman and affirmed dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. Ga. Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 335 F.3d 1259 (11th Cir. 2003) (Ex Post Facto doctrine can apply to parole-policy changes)
- Fuller v. Ga. St. Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 851 F.2d 1307 (11th Cir. 1988) (listing factors considered in parole decisions)
- Campbell v. Rainbow City, 434 F.3d 1306 (11th Cir. 2006) (standard for class-of-one equal protection claims)
- Grider v. City of Auburn, 618 F.3d 1240 (11th Cir. 2010) (comparators must be prima facie identical)
- Hafer v. Melo, 502 U.S. 21 (1991) (Eleventh Amendment does not bar suits for individual-capacity liability under § 1983)
- Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562 (2000) (per curiam) (formulation of class-of-one equal protection claim)
- Ray v. Carthen, 275 Ga. 459 (Ga. 2002) (parole grant or denial is discretionary for eligible inmates)