Case Summary
**Case Summary: Cordrey v. Illinois Prisoner Review Board**
**Docket Number:** 3084389
**Court:** Illinois Appellate Court
**Decision Date:** [Insert Decision Date]
**Overview:**
In the case of Cordrey v. Illinois Prisoner Review Board, the petitioner, Cordrey, challenged the decision made by the Illinois Prisoner Review Board (IPRB) regarding his parole eligibility and the conditions imposed upon him as a result of his incarceration.
**Facts:**
- Cordrey was incarcerated following convictions for serious criminal offenses.
- After serving a portion of his sentence, he became eligible for parole and sought review by the IPRB.
- The IPRB reviewed Cordrey's case and made determinations regarding his suitability for parole based on various factors, including his behavior in prison, participation in rehabilitation programs, and the nature of his offenses.
- Cordrey contested the IPRB's determination, claiming it was arbitrary, unsupported by evidence, and violated his rights to due process.
**Issues:**
1. Whether the IPRB's decision regarding Cordrey's parole eligibility was supported by sufficient evidence presented during the hearing.
2. Whether the procedures followed by the IPRB complied with statutory and constitutional requirements.
**Ruling:**
The Illinois Appellate Court reviewed the record and the findings of the IPRB. The court focused on the evidence presented at the parole hearing, the reasons given by the IPRB for its decision, and the adherence to procedural requirements during the review process.
The court upheld the IPRB's decision, finding that:
- The IPRB's conclusions were reasonable and based on the evidence provided.
- Procedural safeguards were properly observed, thereby ensuring that Cordrey's rights were not violated.
**Conclusion:**
The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the ruling of the IPRB, emphasizing the board's discretion in parole matters and the importance of its evaluations in determining the safety and rehabilitation of inmates. Cordrey's appeal was denied, which effectively maintained the denial of his parole request.
**Significance:**
This case underscores the balance between an inmate's rights to rehabilitation and the state's interest in public safety. It reaffirms the authority of the Illinois Prisoner Review Board to exercise discretion in parole decisions, considering both the inmate’s behavior and the severity of past offenses.
(Note: For specific details such as dates and procedural posture, please refer to judicial opinions or court documents regarding this case.)