In Matter of King v. Division of Parole, 190 A.D.2d 423 (1st Dept. 1993), the parole applicant who faced possible life in prison on a conviction for murder was shown to be fully "rehabilitated" by his accomplishments in prison. He had participated in educational and rehabilitative programs and seemed to have achieved all that was possible for him to achieve in prison, yet his parole applications were routinely denied every 2 years based on the severity of the crime committed 22 years earlier. The record showed that the commissioner in King discussed with the prisoner his philosophy regarding capital punishment and even puzzled with the prisoner over how to best solve the "dilemma" created by the state's failure to execute him before he had the opportunity to become the model citizen he then appeared to be. As affirmed by the Court of Appeals, "The establishment of penal policy is not the role of the Parole Board or of any other administrative agency...The role of the Parole Board is not to resentence petitioner according to the personal opinions of its members as to the appropriate penalty for murder, but to determine whether as of this moment given all of the relevant statutory factors, he should be released." (King, supra, at 432.)