The Court of Appeal holds that prisoners eligible for early parole consideration pursuant to Prop 57 (those sentenced to a determinate term for a nonviolent felony) are not constitutionally entitled to an in-person parole consideration hearing under PC 3041.5. The court finds that the language of Prop 57 does not reflect an intent to require an in-person hearing, and that the “paper review” process challenged in this case does not violate equal protection or procedural due process principles.
^