Krug v. New Jersey State Parole Board

The defendant appealed the denial of his parole on the grounds that the Parole Board’s reliance on pre-2016 information violated the 1979 Parole Act’s limitation to “new information,” the state’s ex post fact clause, and the U.S. Constitution’s ex post facto clause. In making this claim, the defendant argued the retroactive application of the 1997 amendmnet to the Parole Act, which abolished the 1979 Act’s “new information” limitation, was unconstitutional. The court disagreed, finding that the Parole Act of 1948, which was in effect at the time of the defendant’s offenses, allowed the Parole Board to consider “all existing available records,” including an inmate’s criminal history and the seriousness of the offense.