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.
IN RE: Michael CHANG, Petitioner-Appellant, For a Judgment, etc., v. Glen GOORD, etc., et al., Respondents-Respondents.
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (William McCooe, J.), entered on or about August 4, 2001, which dismissed the CPLR article 78 petition seeking a direction to respondents to recalculate petitioner's credit for time spent in jail, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Petitioner is not entitled to receive credit for almost four years of Federal jail time against the sentence he is currently serving in this State. Petitioner would be entitled to such credit only if he could demonstrate that his Federal incarceration was solely the result of detainers issued by this State (see, Penal Law § 70.30[3]; Matter of Peterson v. New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs., 100 A.D.2d 73, 473 N.Y.S.2d 473). On the contrary, the record discloses that petitioner's Federal incarceration, for which he received credit toward his Federal sentence, was occasioned by his having been charged with Federal crimes that were unrelated to the crimes of which he was convicted and for which he is currently incarcerated in this State, and there is no indication that he was denied bail in the Federal matter, or was otherwise unable to obtain his release from custody, solely because of this State's detainer (see, Matter of Bentley v. Demskie, 250 A.D.2d 886, 673 N.Y.S.2d 226, appeal dismissed 92 N.Y.2d 884, 678 N.Y.S.2d 586, 700 N.E.2d 1222, cert. denied 525 U.S. 1044, 119 S.Ct. 597, 142 L.Ed.2d 539). We have considered and rejected petitioner's remaining claims.
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: June 20, 2002
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First 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)