Louisiana Pardon Board denies most clemency requests, recommends commutation and one pardon restoration

The Pardon Board convened Monday, Sept. 8, 2025, to consider a slate of clemency and commutation applications submitted by incarcerated individuals across multiple Louisiana correctional facilities. Board members reviewed each applicant’s criminal history, institutional record and victim statements before casting votes on outcomes ranging from denials to recommendations for commutation and a restoration-of-firearms pardon.

Why it matters: The board’s decisions affect long-term sentences, parole eligibility and statutory restoration of rights for people convicted of violent and nonviolent offenses. Several cases drew detailed victim testimony and objections from district attorneys, while other applicants presented records of program completion, employment plans and family support.

Summary of outcomes and context

Votes at a glance (each entry lists the applicant, charge at filing, board motion or recommendation and the meeting outcome):

- Applicant: Richard [last name redacted] — manslaughter (Washington Parish). Motion discussed: some board members proposed commutation to 20 years with immediate parole eligibility; law-enforcement and victim opposition was strong. Outcome: denied (board recorded that the application did not receive the four favorable votes required). Evidence in transcript: applicant testimony and votes were recorded beginning in the meeting packet for the Rayburn Correctional Center case and concluding with a denial announced on the record.

- Applicant: Roberto Castro Valdez — manufacture/growth of marijuana (April 2008 first-offender case). Motion: a recommended pardon with limited conditions (some board members proposed a 17-year “cleansing” period). Outcome: denied — Castro received three favorable votes and thus fell short of the four votes required for a favorable recommendation.

- Applicant: Roy McLaughlin — first-degree murder and related charges. Motion/consideration: multiple family members and the district attorney’s office spoke in opposition; several board members cited lack of remorse, escape attempts and law-enforcement opposition. Outcome: denied (four votes to deny).

- Applicant: Woodrow (Woodrow/Woodrow Hamilton in transcript) — first-degree murder (Calcasieu Parish). Outcome: denied (four votes to deny). Victims’ families and law enforcement strongly opposed.

- Applicant: Larry James — second-degree murder (Terrebonne Parish), serving 44 years at time of hearing. Motion: board member moved to recommend commutation to a 99-year sentence with immediate parole eligibility, citing age, length of incarceration and program completion; there was opposition from a victim present. Outcome: recommendation to the governor to commute to 99 years with immediate parole eligibility (the board recorded a majority recommendation and will forward it to the governor).

- Applicant: Howard Jackson — first-degree [offense type in transcript], lengthy institutional history. Outcome: denied (did not receive the required favorable votes).

- Applicant: Michael Montgomery — second-degree murder (Lafayette Parish). Outcome: denied (four votes to deny were recorded); victim-family opposition and law-enforcement objections were decisive.

- Applicant: David Stewart — first-degree robbery (Jefferson Parish). Motion: multiple board members noted sustained programming and stable behavior; the district attorney asked for a long-term substance-abuse plan. Outcome: board recommended commuting his life sentence to 30 years with immediate parole eligibility; the recommendation included a board member’s stipulation that DOC-approved, long-term substance-abuse treatment be pursued at parole stage.

- Applicant: Wilfred (Wilfred Edwards in transcript) — manslaughter (14th Judicial District). Outcome: denied (board recorded four votes to deny); the district attorney’s office and victim families opposed the request.

- Applicant: Frederick Brown — second-degree robbery (Caddo Parish) with severe victim injuries; transcript shows extensive victim and family testimony. Outcome: denied (application did not receive the four votes required for clemency).

- Applicant: Ted Alexis — convictions including first-degree murder (1993 case described in multiple victim statements). Outcome: denied (board recorded four votes to deny).

- Applicant: Michael Gray Graves — prior misdemeanor possession of marijuana (1997) with an expungement noted in the record; request included restoration of firearms rights. Outcome: board voted unanimously to recommend a pardon with restoration of firearms rights and will forward the recommendation to the governor.

- Applicant: Kenya Smith — felony convictions for drug possession and a later federal charge; family spoke in support, and the applicant described steady employment and college completion since release. Outcome: denied (several board members cited federal charge history and only five years off supervision as reasons to deny restoration of firearms now).

Board reasoning and recurring themes

- Victim statements and law-enforcement input carried strong weight. In multiple cases the board explicitly cited persistent victim opposition, serious injuries to victims, and prosecutors’ concerns as decisive factors.

- Institutional rehabilitation and family support mattered. Applicants who presented sustained institutional programming, stable custody records and concrete release plans (employment, housing, family support) received more positive consideration. Where the board voted to recommend relief, the members noted age, long periods of incarceration, and program participation as deciding elements.

- Procedural thresholds shaped outcomes. Several applicants received favorable votes short of the four required for a positive outcome; the board’s rules requiring a supermajority meant some strongly divided cases were denied despite multiple yes votes.

Notable quotes (short excerpts from applicants’ statements recorded in the transcript): - Frederick Brown, on taking responsibility and rehabilitation: "I take full responsibility for the crime and the pain and the fear and the trauma that it caused the victim and their family. I’m deeply remorseful…" (public statement to the board during his case). - David Stewart, on his change while incarcerated: "I gave my life to God… I came to Angola and utilized the programs… I chose to be a better man." (statement to the board during his hearing).

What’s next

- Recommended commutations and the single recommended pardon (the Graves case) will be forwarded to the governor’s office for final action, per the board’s statutory process. Applicants denied by the board may reapply later or pursue other remedies available under law.

Meeting context and scale

- The board heard cases from multiple facilities (Rayburn Correctional Center, Louisiana State Penitentiary/Angola, David Wade Correctional Center, Richland Parish Detention Center and Wayne Hunt Correctional Center among others). Proceedings combined in-person and Zoom participation by applicants, family members, wardens, and district attorney representatives. Several hearings included extended victim testimony and, in some cases, contested factual accounts of the underlying events.

Ending note

- Board members routinely stressed the distinction between institutional rehabilitation and public-safety risk; even where members praised applicants’ programming, persistent victim or law-enforcement opposition and statutory thresholds often determined the final vote.

Votes and formal outcomes listed above were announced on the record during the Sept. 8, 2025 Pardon Board sessions. Individual case transcripts contain verbatim questions, program listings and victim statements that informed each decision.