273 A.3d 426
N.J.2022Background
- In 1973 Acoli (aka Clark Edward Squire) was convicted of murder and related offenses for the Turnpike shooting that killed State Trooper Werner Foerster; he received life plus additional years and became parole-eligible in 1993 under the 1979 Parole Act standard.
- From the 1990s onward Acoli served in federal custody, completed ~120 institutional programs, had decades of largely infraction-free conduct, and received multiple favorable institutional/psychological reports.
- At the 2010 parole review a Board psychologist (Dr. Goorwitz) found no psychological contraindication to parole; a two-member panel and then the full Board denied parole; the Appellate Division reversed in 2014 but this Court remanded for a full Board hearing.
- Before the 2016 full-board hearing the Board obtained a new psychologist (Dr. Van Pelt), who assessed Acoli as low-to-moderate recidivism risk but questioned his candor; at the six-hour hearing the Board pressed Acoli about his recollection of the shooting and elicited a speculative answer.
- The Parole Board denied parole (imposing a 15-year future eligibility term); a divided Appellate Division panel affirmed; the New Jersey Supreme Court granted review and reversed, ordering release under the 1979 statutory standard.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Acoli) | Defendant's Argument (Parole Board) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper legal standard and burden under the 1979 Parole Act | 1979 Act creates a presumption in favor of parole; State must prove by preponderance there is a "substantial likelihood" of reoffense | Board contends standard is predictive and entitled to deference; it applied the 1979 standard | Court: Apply 1979 Act; burden shifts to State to show substantial likelihood of recidivism; deferential review applies but is not blind |
| Whether Board proved substantial likelihood of reoffense | Denial unsupported: Board overemphasized late-hearing speculation and memory gaps while ignoring decades of rehabilitation, favorable psychology, and advanced age | Board relied on its live-assessment of credibility, the offense gravity, Dr. Van Pelt’s concerns, and risk that Acoli’s radical views could reemerge | Court: Board did not meet its burden; record lacks substantial credible evidence of a substantial likelihood of reoffense |
| Permissible focus on offender’s account of the crime | Acoli: decades-old imperfect memory is not dispositive; coercive or repeated questioning produced speculative answer that Board improperly penalized | Board: credibility and genuineness of remorse are central and it reasonably disbelieved Acoli’s explanations | Court: Board over-focused on recollection/inconsistency; asking for speculation then faulting him was improper; memory gaps alone cannot justify denial under Trantino principles |
| Weight accorded to psychological evaluations, institutional record, and age | Acoli: multiple favorable evaluations, long-term good conduct, program completion, honor-unit status, and advanced age strongly weigh for release | Board: recent psychologist and hearing observations outweighed earlier reports and institutional record; Board entitled to rely on the most recent evaluation and live credibility cues | Court: Board improperly discounted favorable evidence and relied on a single unfavorable view; age and empirical decline in recidivism with age were not meaningfully considered; reversal warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- Trantino v. State Parole Bd., 166 N.J. 113 (N.J. 2001) (Board may not selectively rely on limited evidence and must address long-term rehabilitative proof)
- Trantino v. State Parole Bd., 154 N.J. 19 (N.J. 1998) (parole decision unsupported by substantial evidence must be set aside)
- Trantino v. State Parole Bd., 89 N.J. 347 (N.J. 1982) (Parole Act creates a presumption in favor of parole; gravity of offense cannot alone justify continued punishment)
- State Parole Bd. v. Byrne, 93 N.J. 192 (N.J. 1983) (1979 Act shifts burden to State to prove prisoner should not be released)
- Greenholtz v. Inmates of Neb. Penal & Corr. Complex, 442 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1979) (parole determinations focus on what an inmate is and may become)
- State Parole Bd. v. Cestari, 224 N.J. Super. 534 (App. Div. 1988) (mere potential to reoffend insufficient; substantial likelihood required)
- Henry v. Rahway State Prison, 81 N.J. 571 (N.J. 1980) (parole decisions reviewable for arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable action)
- State v. Nelson, 155 N.J. 487 (N.J. 1998) (murder of police officer is a particularly grave crime)