M. Mandelcorn

The applicant, a federal inmate serving a sentence in a maximum security institution, applied for a writ of habeas corpus after his request to transfer to a medium security institution was denied.

The warden maintained his maximum security classification despite a psychological assessment and Security Reclassification Scale indicating medium security.

The court dismissed the application, holding that maintaining an existing security classification does not constitute a deprivation of liberty, and therefore habeas corpus is not available.

The applicant sought leave under s. 745.6 of the Criminal Code to proceed to a jury hearing to reduce his period of parole ineligibility for a life sentence imposed for first degree murder.

The court applied the post‑2011 threshold under s. 745.61 requiring the applicant to demonstrate, on a balance of probabilities, a substantial likelihood that a jury would reduce the period of parole ineligibility.

Although the applicant demonstrated positive institutional conduct and program participation during incarceration, psychological assessments raised concerns about his failure to accept full responsibility and refusal to identify accomplices involved in the offence.

Considering the statutory criteria under s. 745.63, including the brutal nature of the murder, victim impact evidence, and lack of genuine accountability, the court concluded that a unanimous jury would not likely grant relief.

The application was dismissed with leave to reapply after five years.