STATE OF ILLINOIS
BRUCE RAUNER, GOVERNOR
PRISONER REVIEW BOARD
EN BANC MINUTE SHEET- OPEN SESSION
MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2013
Inmate Name: Donald Grant IDOC Number & Institution: L02079
The Illinois Prisoner Review Board met in open En Banc session at 319 E Madison, Springfield, IL, on November 21, 2013, at the 8:00 a.m. session to discuss and deliberate parole eligibility for the following inmates:
Members present were: Chairman A. Monreal, A. Blackman-Donovan, E. Bowers, E. Crigler, S. Diaz, E. Gregg, C. Findley, T. Johnson, J. Madison, W. Norton, J. Parrack, V. Rush, D. Shelton, W. Simmons and G. Tyler.
Other(s) present: K. Knappmeyer, Recording Secretary
Summary of discussion for parole consideration: Member Tyler presented a summary of the parole interview and a review of all file materials.
Donald Grant was interviewed for parole consideration on October 15, 2013 at Dixon Correctional Center. Factors by the Board included, but not limited to, was inmate testimony, file review, institutional adjustment and parole plans.
Mr. Grant is serving 60-180 years for murder and 20-60 years for armed robbery. In May, 1976 Mr. Grant and an associate went to a supermarket the day before the instant offense and had an altercation with the security officer. The next day he went back and shot and killed the security officer. He admits responsibility and expressed remorse. Inmate Grant stated that at the time of the instant offense he had been drinking a lot.
Mr. Grant’s institutional adjustment has been excellent. He is A Grade and performs his assignments in a responsible and professional manner. He has taken some college courses and has been assigned. He has participated in all available programming. He was transferred to Dixon in 1991. He has had two minor tickets since that time. He is a Vietnam Veteran. He has made excellent use of his time since incarcerated. Counselors describe him as pleasant, motivated and responsible. He is currently assigned in the print shop and has received several certifications. He has a good rapport with staff and has earned two Associate’s degrees. He received a three year set in 2010.
Discussion:
TJ: How is his health? GT: Health seems to be good.
ABD: What is his MSR date? GT: MSR date is in 2064.
EB: The victim was a retired Peoria County Deputy and was shot in the back of the head execution style. He will not support and will recommend a three-year set.
GT: Member Tyler stated she will not support a three year set. She believes that due to his excellent inmate adjustment and good conduct, he has at least earned the right to be heard.
Jerry Brady, Peoria County State’s Attorney, stated the defendant was stealing meat from a grocery store and was kicked out by the victim, the security guard. The next day he went back and shot the officer in the back of the head. The defendant was also convicted of two armed robberies and a burglary. It is important to recognize the premeditation in this case. They are asking for a three-year set.
Member Tyler concluded by stating based on his institutional adjustment she supports parole for Inmate Grant. He is not the same person he was when he committed the instant offense. He takes full responsibility and worked hard to rehabilitate himself. He has caused no problems since being incarcerated and has not caused problems for staff.
EG: What is his parole plan? GT: His parole plans are to transition at St. Leonard’s House in Chicago. This has been confirmed.
Motion to Grant. (GT – CF). Motion does not carry by a vote of 3 – 12. Voting in favor of the motion were Members Tyler, Crigler and Madison. Members Blackman-Donovan, Bowers, Diaz, Gregg, Findley, Johnson, Norton, Parrack, Rush, Shelton, Simmons and Chairman Monreal dissented.
Motion for a three-year set. (EB – ABD). Motion does not carry 7 – 8. Voting in favor of motion were Members Bowers, Blackman-Donovan, Diaz, Gregg, Norton, Shelton and Chairman Monreal. Members Crigler, Findley, Johnson, Madison, Parrack, Rush, Simmons and Tyler dissented.
Parole is denied and petitioner will be heard again in 2014.
“The Board makes a specific finding that the release of victim protest letters could subject a person to actual risk of physical harm”.