Thomas Trantino, Appellant-Respondent and Cross-Appellant v. New Jersey State Parole Board, Respondent-Appellant…

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that the State Parole Board's denial of Thomas Trantino's parole was arbitrary and capricious because it was not based on a preponderance of the evidence and relied on remote and selective evidence. Accordingly, the Court affirmed in part and modified in part the Appellate Division judgment, ordering the Board to grant parole with specified pre‑release and post‑release conditions. Justice Baime, dissenting, argued that the Board's decision was supported by substantial credible evidence and should be upheld.