Parole; exception to limitation on the application of parole statutes.

104 (2000), in which the Supreme Court held that a jury should be instructed on the fact that parole has been abolished, for a felony committed on or after the abolition of parole going into effect on January 1, 1995; (ii) can prove by the preponderance of the evidence that the jury in his case was not instructed on the fact that parole has been abolished; and (iii) remained incarcerated for the offense on July 1, 2025, and the offense was not one of the following: (a) a Class 1 felony; (b) if the victim was a minor, rape, forcible sodomy, object sexual penetration, or aggravated sexual battery or an attempt to commit any such act; or (c) carnal knowledge. The bill also requires the Parole Board to establish procedures for consideration of parole of persons entitled to it and also provides that any person who is eligible for parole as of July 1, 2025, shall be scheduled for a parole interview no later than July 1, 2026, allowing for extension of time for reasonable cause.