may be sent in directly by the probationer, or by arrangement they may be filed with some peace officer of the locality in which the probationer resides and forwarded to the probation office by such officer.

Field supervision.-Because of limitations in personnel and the large amount of time and energy which has to be spent in making investigations, the supervision of probationers is accomplished primarily through reports of the probationer either personal or written. Maricopa County has two full-time adult officers and no clerical staff whatever. With a case load of two to four hundred per officer and some 300 or more investigations to be made each year, very little time can be devoted to field supervision. It is only in those cases where the probation officers receive information that the probationer has violated the conditions of his probation or is about to violate them that they can spare the time to go into the field and look up the probationer. Even in presentence investigations, these officers are unable to take the time to make all the contacts with the family, the employer, and the friends and associates of the defendant that they feel should be made. In Pima County there is no field supervision possible in adult probation cases. Official sponsors or advisers to probationers are not used in Arizona.

Interstate cooperation.-An act of 1937 authorized the Governor to enter into compacts with the authorities of other States for the transfer of parolees and probationers and for their out-of-State supervision.39

PAROLE

History.-Parole in Arizona was first recognized in the territorial laws of 1901. Under the provisions then enacted, upon the recommendation of the superintendent of the territorial prison, the territorial auditor, and the citizen member of the board of control, the Governor might grant parole to a first offender after he had served 1 year.1 Provision was also made for equipping the parolee when. released.2

39 Ariz. Laws 1937, ch. 42.

1 Ariz. Rev. Stat. (1901) §§ 3590-3594.

2 Id. §§ 3595-3596.

The first indeterminate sentence law was adopted in 1907.3 Under the provisions of that act the court, in its discretion, except in cases of first-degree murder or in cases of offenders who had served time in prison previously, might impose, instead of a definite sentence, a "general sentence," with a minimum and a maximum not exceeding the maximum provided by statute. No prisoner could be released until the minimum had been served. The Governor had authority to parole these indeterminate sentence prisoners according to provisions applicable to other prisoners. Parolees were in the legal custody and under the control of the Governor and the board of control.*

This law was amended in 1909, but little change was made except that paroles were granted by the Governor on recommendation of the board of control.

The indeterminate sentence law was amended by an act of the first legislature of the State in 1912. That act took from the sentencing court discretion to choose between a definite and an indeterminate sentence and compelled the court to impose an indeterminate sentence in all cases, except those of first-degree murder, or offenses committed before the enactment."

The same act provided for the administration of the parole laws by a "board of commissioners of paroled prisoners," consisting of the Governor, auditor, attorney general, prison physician, and the prison warden who was the chairman."

With the adoption of the Penal Code of 1913 that board was superseded by the "board of pardons and paroles" as constituted at present.10 Another provision gave the exclusive power of parole to the new board.11

Ariz. Laws 1912, ch. 46, § 1.

La Porte v. State, 14 Ariz. 530, 132 Pac. 563 (1913). 'Ariz. Laws 1912, ch. 46, § 2.

10 Ariz. Penal Code (1913) § 1301.

"Id. 1302. The Governor was not in sympathy with these acts and he vetoed them. They were passed over his veto and referred to the people who approved them in 1914. An attempt was made later to return certain parole powers to the Governor (Ariz. Laws 1919, ch. 78) but failed on referendum to the people in 1920.

The parole law as adopted in the Penal Code of 1913 has undergone practically no change since."

12

By whom administered.-Parole is now granted and administered by the board of pardons and paroles 13 which consists of the attorney general, the superintendent of public instruction 14 and a citizen member, selected by the other two members 15 The citizen member is chairman of the board. Provision is made for the payment of the expenses of all members of the board and for the salary of the citizen member.16

The parole clerk at the State prison acts as the secretary for the board.17

No persons other than the citizen member of the board are employed to supervise parolees.

The board has exclusive power to grant paroles and the Governor has no connection with parole procedure other than to transmit to the board any applications for parole which he receives.18 The board may make such rules and regulations for the conduct of its business as it may deem proper.19

12 The provisions of the Penal Code of 1913 were copied largely from the California Penal Code.

13 Ariz. Rev. Code Ann. (Struckmeyer, 1928) § 5220.

14 These officials are elected for 2-year terms. Ariz. Const. art. V, § 1.

15 Ariz. Rev. Code Ann. (Struckmeyer, 1928) § 5219. In 1935, one of the ex officio members of the board was newly elected to office and one was reelected. The newly elected member was desirous of changing the board chairman but the reelected member did not desire a change. A test case was taken to the supreme court. The holding was that since the board of pardons and paroles was a continuing body despite changes in membership, after the citizen member is appointed he can be removed only by joint action of the two officers appointing him; and in the absence of a vacancy, the citizen member continues in office until the qualification of his successor. Hofman v. Frohmiller, 45 Ariz. 365, 43 P. (2d) 1007 (1935).

16 Ariz. Rev. Code Ann. (Struckmeyer, 1928) § 5219. Each member receives actual traveling and hotel expenses while performing duties pertaining to the board. The citizen member receives $7 per day while performing his duties, or about $1,400 per year.

17 Ibid. The clerk is appointed by the Governor and receives $200 per year. Ariz. Rev. Code Ann. (Courtright, Supp. 1935) § 2929. He has other duties as a prison employee.

18 Id. (Struckmeyer, 1928) § 5220. This incidental duty of the Governor does not affect the board's exclusive power over parole. State v. Super. Ct. 30 Ariz. 332, 246 Pac. 1033 (1926). Exclusive power over parole is given to the board by statute and the Governor is powerless to release on parole. Laird v. Sims, 16 Ariz. 521, 147 Pac. 738 (1915).

19 Ariz. Rev. Code Ann. (Struckmeyer, 1928) § 5223. The board has established rules governing parole from jail. Rules of the Board, Nos. 29-32.

Persons eligible for parole.—Every prisoner confined upon an indeterminate sentence, 20 whose minimum term has expired, or any prisoner serving a definite sentence at the time the Penal Code of 1913 became effective, is given an opportunity to apply for release upon parole or for an absolute discharge.2

The board can consider for parole only those prisoners who have served their minimum terms.22 If the board wishes to parole a prisoner who has been sentenced for a long minimum term before the term has expired this can be accomplished only by reduction of the term through commutation.23

Although the board has authority to parole a life prisoner at any time, since the statutes make no restrictions in such cases, such prisoners are not in practice paroled until several years have been served.

Method of application.-A prisoner may receive consideration for parole either upon the recommendation of the superintendent of the prison or upon his own direct application. In practice, formal applications are not often filed. The list prepared by the parole clerk serves as the application.

20 Ariz. Rev. Code Ann. (Struckmeyer, 1928) § 5109. The court determines both the maximum and minimum terms within the statutes, except where statute provides otherwise, as in the cases where the jury fixes sentence. Indian Fred v. State, 36 Ariz. 48, 282 Pac. 930 (1929). The tendency is to fix a comparatively high minimum. Infra note 23.

Ariz. Rev. Code Ann. (Struckmeyer, 1928) § 5109; Rules of the Board, No. 5. If the minimum sentence is served, the board is duty bound to give a hearing. State v. Super. Ct., 30 Ariz. 332, 246 Pac. 1033 (1926).

This is held to be jurisdictional. State v. Super. Ct., 30 Ariz. 332, 246 Pac. 1033 (1926). There is no absolute right to a discharge until the expiration of the maximum term less good time deductions. Orme v. Rogers, 32 Ariz. 502, 260 Pac. 190 (1927). The minimum sentence is that fixed by the court unless good-time deductions from the maximum reduce the term below the minimum. Rules of the Board, Nos. 6, 19, 20; Ariz. Rev. Code Ann. (Struckmeyer, 1928) 5318; Clark v. State, 23 Ariz. 470, 202 Pac. 1032 (1922).

"This device is commonly used. It is frequently desirable because of the long minimum sentences given by the trial courts. There seems to be some misunderstanding of the operation of the two "good-time" statutes, one of which is for graduated deductions and the other for double time deductions for those in positions of trust. Ariz. Rev. Code Ann. (Struckmeyer, 1928) §§ 5318, 5319. As a matter of prison administration many prisoners enjoy positions of trust and obtain "two-for-one" time deductions. Hence, many are entitled to discharge before they are eligible for parole upon expiration of their maximum terms. Consequently, in order to maintain some outside supervision over the prisoner, his minimum sentence is commuted in order that he may be eligible for parole before he is entitled to an absolute discharge.

Rules of the Board, No. 4.

The parole clerk makes up, for each meeting of the board, a list of prisoners whose minimum terms will expire within 2 months of the meeting. The application of a prisoner who has escaped is not considered unless he has served at least 1 year in addition to his minimum sentence.25 Neither does the board entertain an application by a defendant pending an appeal to the supreme court by him nor at any time before judgment and commitment of the trial court has been pronounced.26

If parole is denied, another application will not be entertained for at least 6 months.27

28

Hearing: Prior investigation.-In considering a case for parole the board has before it a statement of the case prepared by the trial judge and prosecuting county attorney,2 a summary of information taken from the prison records by the prison secretary and inmate assistants, and correspondence and other data collected by the chairman of the board. Usually the chairman alone is familiar with the cases before the hearing is held.

Before a case for parole is considered by the board, notice must be given the judge of the superior court and the county attorney of the county in which the prisoner was sentenced.29

Hearing: Time and conduct of hearing.-Although by law the board is required to meet quarterly only,30 meetings are held every 2 months at the prison. Usually some persons other than the board members attend.31

Each prisoner, as he appears, is given opportunity to make a statement, and he is questioned. The board makes

Rules of the Board, No. 24.

20 Id. No. 18.

* Id. No. 17; Ariz. Rev. Code Ann. (Struckmeyer, 1928) § 5320. 28 Ariz. Rev. Code Ann. (Struckmeyer, 1928) § 5328.

20 Id. § 5320, as amended Ariz. Laws 1937, ch. 28. The notice must state the name of the prisoner involved and fix the date of the hearing and must be sent by registered mail. Parole cannot be granted within 30 days after giving notice. Such notice is not required: (1) when there is imminent danger of death of the person imprisoned, or (2) when the term of imprisonment of the applicant is within 10 days of its expiration. Ibid.

80 Id. § 5219. Rules of the Board, No. 1. A hearing in a case must originate at the prison although it may be continued at the capitol. Ibid.

81 They may be the prison superintendent, the parole clerk, the assistant superintendent, the captain of the yard, the teacher, a chaplain, the prison secretary, a bailiff, a reporter, or friends or families of the applicants. Attendance of lawyers is discouraged.