Hill v. Walker

Defendant, who was serving sentences for two murders, claimed violation of due process in parole hearings and in amendments to parole hearings and procedures. There is no constitutional or inherent right of a convicted person to be conditionally released from confinement prior to expiration of a valid sentence, as the conviction, with its procedural safeguards, has extinguished the right to liberty. Illinois parole statute does not create a legitimate expectation of parole that rises to level of liberty interest protected by procedural due process. Parole Board's revised interpretation of the "seriousness of the offense" criterion, to require murderers to serve more time before being paroled, does not violate ex post facto clauses. Amendment to Section 3-3-5(f) of Unified Code of Corrections, which provides for less frequent parole hearings, does not violate ex post facto clauses of federal and state constitutions, and does not create a significant risk of increasing a defendant's incarceration. (KILBRIDE, THOMAS, GARMAN, KARMEIER, BURKE, and THEIS, concurring.)