In the case of Michael J. Cavanaugh, Executive Director, South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services et al. v. Gary Lee Roller in 1993, the U.S Supreme Court examined whether a state parole board was required to provide an inmate with access to his file prior to a parole hearing under due process clause of Fourteenth Amendment. The court ruled that there is no constitutional requirement for states to offer parole or other early release programs; therefore when they do so it does not create any liberty interest protected by Due Process Clause which would require disclosure of documents before hearings are held.

In the dissenting opinion for Cavanaugh v. Roller, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling granting habeas corpus relief to Gary Lee Roller was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that the state courts had not unreasonably applied federal law in denying Roller's claim of ineffective counsel during his trial and sentencing for murder. They contended that there were strategic reasons behind defense counsel’s decisions at trial, including their choice not to present certain mitigating evidence during sentencing phase due to its potential negative impact on jury perception of Roller’s character. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's conclusion about prejudice resulting from these alleged errors by defense counsel, arguing instead that even if such errors occurred, they did not have substantial effect or influence in determining jury verdict given overwhelming evidence against Roller.