Parole board hears cases at multiple parishes; grants conditional parole in two cases and denies several others

The Louisiana Committee on Parole met at multiple parish detention centers on April 22 and issued a string of rulings on individual parole requests, denying most but granting conditional release in two cases with specific conditions.

The panel, chaired for the day by Pete Freeman and joined by members identified in the transcript as Mr. Tillis and Mr. Barra, heard testimony from inmates, family members, prosecutors and facility staff at Bossier, Richland, East Feliciana, Southwest Transitional Work Program, Plaquemines, Ouachita, Tensaw and Concordia facilities. The board repeatedly cited criminal history, law-enforcement opposition and incomplete programming as reasons to deny parole in several matters, while approving conditional releases where members said they saw sustained work or program participation.

Why it matters: Parole decisions affect victims, defendants and community supervision resources. Several grants included firm conditions — work release periods, restitution schedules, substance-abuse evaluations, and required classes — that the board said must be met before full parole is effective.

Key outcomes and highlights

- Bossier (DLC 331838, named in the record as James): The panel denied parole for the inmate identified as James (DLC 331838). After reviewing the record and public opposition — the transcript notes “7 victims that are opposed,” opposition from the attorney general, the district attorney and the sheriff — the board took the matter into executive session and then voted to deny. Mr. Tillis said, “my vote’s gonna be to deny today,” and Mr. Barra concurred; the chair echoed the denial and directed that James complete further classes and reapply (the board suggested reapplying in about a year). The transcript records family speakers in support and program staff reporting a projected program completion date of June 27.

- Richland (Latelous Moore, DLC 456182): The board denied Moore’s parole request. Freeman said Moore’s account “doesn’t correspond at all with what we’re reading” and voted to deny; the other members concurred. Record notes: Moore has prior drug-related charges on his record (a past marijuana distribution charge is in the record), and the board referenced law-enforcement opposition.

- East Feliciana (Winston Wesley, 386610): The panel granted parole conditional on completion of six months of work release followed by parole with special conditions. The board noted Wesley’s year-plus on work release, vocational skills (welding, carpentry) and letters of support from employers and family. The board required six months additional supervised work release, restitution as listed by the pre-parole investigation, completion of a victim-awareness class and a substance-abuse evaluation with follow-up as recommended.

- Southwest Transitional Work Program (Ricky Green, DLC 375750): The panel granted parole. Members cited Green’s long time served in custody, completion of programs and stable work at a Metal Plate employer. Conditions include a substance-abuse evaluation and treatment as recommended, and a 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew for six months except for work.

- Plaquemines (Robert Gould, DLC 765950): Parole was denied. Gould told the panel he maintains his innocence and said his attorney advised him to plead; the panel noted the age of the alleged victim, “senseless nature” of the offense, and strong law-enforcement opposition. The board recommended prerelease programming and offender-specific treatment before reconsideration.

- Ouachita (Katrina Maxey, 754946): The panel denied immediate parole but emphasized Maxey’s proximity to her good-time date. Members urged her to complete required classes; Freeman said Maxey could be released soon if she completes outstanding coursework.

- Tinsaw (John Scott, 115941): Parole was denied. Prosecutors and the panel stressed Scott’s extensive criminal record, arrests and offenses that occurred during a declared emergency; the panel noted strong law-enforcement opposition and recommended additional programming.

- Concordia (Jessica Call, 754674): The panel conditionally granted parole subject to completion of required sex-offender (*** offender) programming. Freeman said the board would “get you moved to a place where that program is offered,” and on completion, Call will be released subject to standard supervision and residence approval.

- Concordia (Milton Spurlock, 322065): The panel denied parole. The district attorney’s office and the 20th Judicial District opposed release, citing intervening offenses while on supervision and outstanding restitution in other jurisdictions; the board cited the applicant’s criminal history and law-enforcement opposition.

Discussion versus decision: The transcript records substantial discussion about program completion, restitution, law-enforcement opposition and housing plans. The board distinguished denials from conditional grants: several grants require the inmate to complete a defined step (for example, six months of additional work release in Wesley’s case or completion of a specialized treatment program in Call’s case) before full parole is finalized.

Quotes from the hearings (verbatim and attributed to speakers in the record):

- “I take full responsibility for what I did,” James told the board during his hearing. - “My vote’s gonna be to deny today,” Mr. Tillis said in explaining his vote on one denial. - “We will start planning if he’s once he releases about a month before,” program counselor Jessica Frizzell said about prerelease planning for an inmate expected to complete a six-month program on June 27.

What the board directed most frequently: completion of outstanding programming (prerelease or offender-specific classes), substance-abuse evaluation and treatment where indicated, restitution arrangements per pre-parole investigations, and in some grants, a defined period in supervised work release prior to full parole.

Ending: The panel moved through multiple parish hearings on April 22, issuing case-by-case decisions that balance evidence of rehabilitation, victim and law-enforcement opposition, and documented programming. Several inmates were denied with instructions to complete specified programming before reapplying; two were granted conditional release with explicit supervision and treatment requirements the board said must be met before full parole takes effect.