Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parole Hearings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee on Parole hears multiple cases Jan. 14; several paroles revoked, others reprimanded or continued
Summary
At its Jan. 14, 2026 session, the Louisiana Committee on Parole revoked parole in multiple cases and opted for reprimand or work-release alternatives in others, citing arrests, firearms possession, absconding and unpaid supervision fees. Family members and advocates urged treatment and reentry support in several hearings.
Get email alerts on the Parole Hearings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Louisiana Committee on Parole met Jan. 14, 2026, in Baton Rouge with remote participants from parish jails and decided to revoke parole for several individuals while reprimanding or offering alternatives for others. Chair Cheryl Renata presided over the panel with members Chuck Veil and Pete Freeman present.
The panel heard a string of revocation and supervision-review cases involving arrests for alleged assaults and drug offenses, admitted failures to report, absconding and unpaid supervision fees. In multiple cases the committee balanced misconduct against factors such as homelessness, treatment participation and family circumstances before voting.
Notable outcomes included: a reprimand and conditional return to supervision for Theodore Francis (DOC 484225) contingent on providing an approved residence and weekly in-person reporting for the first 60 days; a reprimand and return to supervision for Joshua Black (DOC 619182) with the same residence and reporting conditions; and revocations of parole for Jamie Hebert (DOC 617584), Kevin Johnson (name used in transcript) and Allen/Adam Sherman (DOC 587223). One case was continued so retained counsel could appear.
Theodore Francis, who told the panel he had been arrested by Covington police on Sept. 2, 2025, for simple battery and said the charge was dismissed Dec. 8, 2025, was reprimanded rather than revoked after the panel stressed that an approved residence must be verified by his supervising officer. "We're giving you a break, mister Francis," Chair Cheryl Renata said as she announced her vote not to revoke and to require weekly reporting and full-time employment as conditions for release.
In Jefferson Parish, Joshua Black admitted missing scheduled reporting appointments because he was homeless and recently obtained a vehicle; he pleaded not guilty to an Oct. possession-with-intent arrest and said he had a pretrial date on Feb. 25. The board voted to reprimand and return him to supervision, conditioning release on an approved residence and a requirement to report weekly for 60 days.
At Orleans Parish Justice Center the panel reviewed Jamie Hebert's case, where the parole officer documented failures to live at the approved residence and multiple missed check-ins tied to relapse. Hebert acknowledged relapse and said he had been on a waiting list for treatment. Despite that, members concluded the repeated noncompliance warranted revocation.
Kevin Johnson appeared with retained counsel Adi McGuire and client advocate Terry Pierce. Counsel urged the board to consider context, brief possession and Johnson’s recent fatherhood; family members and advocates asked for mercy and reentry support. The board found violations, including possession of a firearm, and voted to revoke.
Several themes recurred: homelessness and unstable housing complicated compliance; parolees and advocates repeatedly raised treatment access and waiting lists; and unpaid supervision fees were cited as both a factor in nonpayment and a compliance issue. Panel members frequently coupled enforcement (revocation or reprimand) with requirements for verified housing and reporting or with referrals to work release and reentry programming where feasible.
The committee did not invent new penalties beyond conditions and standard revocation. Where parole was not revoked, the board explicitly set conditions for release (approved residence verified by the supervising officer, weekly in-person reporting for 60 days, and maintenance of employment), and where parole was revoked the chair said the panel would notify the parolee when they would be eligible for another hearing.
The session lasted several hours and included appearances from parole officers, client advocates, attorneys and family members who provided context about treatment efforts, housing and employment prospects. The committee scheduled a continuance in one case at the parolee’s request for counsel to attend. The board closed each case with an announced vote and brief instruction about next steps or eligibility for another hearing.

