In re Coleman
236 Cal. App. 4th 1013
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Coleman received an indeterminate 15-to-life sentence for second-degree murder in 1990 and began serving in October 1990.
- In 2000, while in prison, he was convicted of conspiring to bring a controlled substance into prison and got a consecutive six-year determinate term.
- In October 2012 the Parole Board found Coleman suitable and set an 18-year "base term" for the 1990 offense; the parole grant became effective March 3, 2013 after the Governor did not act.
- CDCR computed Coleman’s release date by starting from the parole-effective date (March 3, 2013), adding the six-year custodial term, and subtracting credits, yielding a 2017 earliest release date.
- Coleman petitioned for habeas, arguing the consecutive custodial term should commence when he completed the Board’s 18-year base term (2008), not the parole-effective date; the superior court granted the petition and ordered release.
- The Court of Appeal reversed, holding Section 1170.1(c) requires the consecutive term to commence when the prisoner would actually have been released (i.e., the parole grant becomes effective), not at the end of the Board’s base term.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When does a consecutive sentence for an in-prison felony commence under Penal Code §1170.1(c)? | Coleman: commencement is when the Board’s base term is completed (the theoretical release date based on base term). | Warden Chappell/CDCR: commencement is when the prisoner would actually have been released — i.e., when parole suitability/grant becomes effective. | Court: §1170.1(c) unambiguously starts the consecutive term when the prisoner otherwise would have been released (the parole grant’s effective date), so CDCR’s calculation was correct. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Bush, 161 Cal.App.4th 133 (discusses difference between base term and actual suitability/release; time beyond base term is lawful custody pending parole suitability)
- In re Dannenberg, 34 Cal.4th 1061 (explains parole suitability and Board discretion balancing public safety over term uniformity)
- In re Lira, 58 Cal.4th 573 (procedural timing of Board decision becoming final and Governor review)
- People v. White, 202 Cal.App.3d 862 (explains harsher treatment of in-prison offenses under §1170.1(c))
- Hodges v. Superior Court, 21 Cal.4th 109 (canon: avoid literal construction only if it produces absurd results)