L. R. MOORE, Plaintiff-Appellant,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; and Warden of Sterling Correctional Facility, Defendants-Appellees.
Rehearing Denied September 6, 2018
County District Court No. 17CV12, Honorable Kevin L. Hoyer,
Moore, Pro Se
H. Coffman, Attorney General, Kathryn A. Starnella, Assistant
Attorney General, Denver, Colorado, for Defendants-Appellees
1] The primary issue raised in this appeal is
whether C.R.C.P. 106.5 provides prison inmates with a means
to obtain judicial review of decisions by the Colorado State
Board of Parole (parole board). Plaintiff, L. R. Moore, an
inmate in the custody of the Colorado Department of
Corrections (DOC), appeals the district courts judgment
dismissing his action seeking C.R.C.P. 106.5 review of a
parole board decision deferring his parole.
2] We conclude that C.R.C.P. 106.5 is not a
mechanism for obtaining judicial review of parole board
decisions. For that reason and others, we affirm the judgment
dismissing Moores action.
3] Moore filed a "Rule 106.5 Petition"
against defendants, the DOCs executive director and the
warden of the prison facility where Moore is housed. In that
petition, and in a later-filed "complaint," Moore
said that he was challenging a March 2017 parole board
decision to defer his parole. He alleged that in making the
decision, the parole board abused its discretion in a number
4] Defendants moved to dismiss the action, arguing
that (1) the district court lacked jurisdiction to review the
parole boards discretionary parole decision and (2)
defendants were not the proper parties to an action
challenging the decision.
5] In various responsive motions, Moore argued that
he was entitled to challenge the parole boards decision
under C.R.C.P. 106.5. He further argued that the case
authority defendants relied on in their motion to dismiss was
"irrelevant" because the cases were all decided
before the promulgation of C.R.C.P. 106.5.
6] The district court ultimately granted defendants