Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Langley v. Bulter

United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Western Division

December 6, 2017

FERRIS R. LANGLEY, Plaintiff,
v.
PAUL G. BULTER, JR., DANNY G. MOODY, and PATRICK McCRORY, [1] Defendants.

          ORDER

          LOUISE W. FLANAGAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         This matter is before the court on defendants' motion for summary judgment (DE 25). The issues raised have been fully briefed and are ripe for adjudication. For the following reasons, the court grants defendants' motion.

         STATEMENT OF THE CASE

         On October 22, 2015, plaintiff, a state inmate, filed this civil rights action pro se pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (DE 1). On April 20, 2016, the court directed plaintiff to particularize his complaint and, specifically, to “name the party responsible for his alleged deprivation, the injury stemming from the party's actions or inactions, and the alleged facts to support his claim.” (DE 9 at 2). On May 16, 2016, plaintiff filed his particularized complaint (“complaint”) against defendants former Governor Pat McCrory (“McCrory”), former Chairman of the North Carolina Post-Release Supervision and Parole Commission (“commission”) Paul G. Bulter, Jr. (“Butler”), and commissioner of the commission Danny G. Moody (“Moody”). (Complaint (DE 12)). The court construes plaintiff's complaint to allege the following claims: wrongful denial of parole eligibility, due process violation, and false imprisonment. With his complaint, plaintiff submitted the following attachments: North Carolina General Statutes concerning parole protocol, two pages from what plaintiff asserts are summaries of notes regarding parole eligibility of certain inmates, and plaintiff's grievance filed with the North Carolina Department of Public Safety Prisons. The court completed its frivolity review on May 27, 2016, and ordered that the case proceed against the defendants named in the complaint.

         On April 3, 2017, defendants filed the instant motion for summary judgment, including a memorandum in support of their motion, statement of material facts, and affidavit of Mary Stevens. Plaintiff filed a response in opposition including a statement of material facts and appendix containing 1) procedures for the mutual agreement parole program (“MAPP”) under the North Carolina Department of Correction Division of Prisons, 2) procedures relating to the responsibilities of the commission, 3) information concerning structured sentencing, and 4) definitions of certain crimes.

         STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

         The undisputed facts are as follows. Plaintiff received suspended sentences and probation in Pitt County Superior Court for the following convictions on the following dates: assault inflicting serious injury on February 20, 1990, two counts of assault on a law enforcement officer and one count of damage to personal property on October 22, 1990, and misdemeanor breaking and entering on July 30, 1991. A subsequent Pitt County conviction on August 1, 1991, for three counts of felony breaking or entering, resulted in a three-year sentence as a committed youthful offender and revocation of plaintiff's probation on the prior convictions.

         On June 29, 1993, plaintiff was convicted in Pitt County of larceny from the person, a Class H felony, for which he received an active term of imprisonment of seven years with a recommendation for work release. On June 7, 1994, plaintiff was granted community service parole by the commission under which he agreed, in part, to obey all state laws.

         Beginning on June 28, 1994, three weeks after being released on community service parole, plaintiff engaged in a series of offenses: 1) two robberies with a firearm on June 28, 1994; 2) second-degree murder on August 3, 1994; and 3) second-degree murder on August 4, 1994.

         On November 10, 1994, the commission revoked plaintiff's community service parole. On December 15, 1994, the commission considered plaintiff for parole on the 1993 larceny conviction but denied parole release at that time.

         Following a trial by jury on the robbery charges, plaintiff was found guilty and, on June 21, 1995, was sentenced to a term of 40 years on the first robbery charge and a term of 25 years on the second robbery charge, to be served consecutively. On April 30, 1997, plaintiff pleaded guilty to the two counts of second-degree murder.[2] On the first murder conviction, plaintiff received a life sentence to run consecutively to his earlier convictions. For the second murder conviction, plaintiff received a life sentence to run consecutively to the life sentence on the first murder conviction.

         Since June 21, 1995, plaintiff has been serving his sentence and is currently incarcerated at Pamlico Correctional Institution. On February 16, 2015, plaintiff requested information regarding his parole eligibility thorough the North Carolina Department of Public Safety Prisons Administrative Remedy Procedures but alleges that he received no response. Defendants assert plaintiff has not been reviewed for parole in over twenty years.

         DISCUSSION

         A. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.