Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Matter of Willie IVY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Glenn S. GOORD, Commissioner, New York State Department of Correctional Services, Respondent-Respondent.
Petitioner commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking additional jail time credit toward his sentence of 25 years to life imposed in 1993. Petitioner was sentenced in 1988 to three concurrent terms of incarceration, the longest of which was 2 1/313 to 7 years. The record establishes that petitioner was released on parole after serving a portion of that sentence and that he absconded, resulting in the imposition of two additional periods of jail time based on his violations of parole. He was arrested in 1992 on a charge of murder, and his conviction of that crime resulted in the 1993 sentence of 25 years to life that, by operation of law, was to run concurrently with the 1988 sentence. Petitioner alleged in his petition that he is entitled to credit on both the 1988 sentence and the 1993 sentence based on the 522 days of jail time served between the time of his arrest in 1992 and his return to the Department of Correctional Services in 1993. That contention lacks merit. As Supreme Court properly determined, petitioner is not entitled to jail time credit against the 1993 sentence for the jail time that was credited against the 1988 sentence (see Matter of McCormack v. Kuhlmann, 188 A.D.2d 779, 780, 591 N.Y.S.2d 229). Additionally, “jail time credit [against the 1993 sentence] ‘shall not include any time that is credited against the term or maximum term of any previously imposed sentence to which [petitioner] is subject’ ” (Matter of Jeffrey v. Ward, 44 N.Y.2d 812, 814, 406 N.Y.S.2d 291, 377 N.E.2d 744), here, the 1988 sentence.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: July 07, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)