Harold Eugene Rogers, Appellant v. Gleenover Knight, Appellee

Summary

The court affirmed dismissal of Rogers’s petition for declaratory judgment and mandamus because the record showed that he was already parole eligible and had received a parole hearing before filing. Because the State did not dispute his asserted entitlement to parole eligibility or a hearing, the court concluded that no justiciable controversy remained, and Rogers offered no evidence contradicting the State’s submission. Justices Hart and Baker, dissenting, would have reversed and remanded because the record did not establish that Rogers’s parole eligibility had been correctly calculated.