L.C. Gray v. PBPP
L.C. Gray v. PBPP - 896 C.D. 2016
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | Aug 31, 2017Background
- Lawrence C. Gray was sentenced to 5–10 years; released on parole in 2011 and had a maximum release date originally set for January 26, 2016.
- Gray was recommitted as a technical parole violator (TPV) after drug use/admission in 2012; Board credited him with time on parole and his MRD did not change.
- Gray was reparoled in 2013, lived in Community Education Center (CEC) and approved residences, and in September 2014 was arrested for new criminal charges; he pled guilty in October 2014 and received 6–23 months plus probation.
- The Board recommitted Gray as a convicted parole violator (CPV) on January 12, 2016, ordered 24 months backtime (or unexpired term) and denied credit for time at liberty on parole, recalculating his MRD to October 16, 2019.
- Gray administratively appealed the recalculation; the Board affirmed and Gray petitioned this Court for review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Board erred by denying credit for time at liberty on parole when recommitting Gray as a CPV under 61 Pa. C.S. §6138(a)(2) | Gray: Board should have credited street time; recalculation unlawful. | Board: §6138(a)(2) permits denial of credit; discretionary denial here is proper. | Court: Held Board did not err; denial of street-time credit allowed and properly exercised. |
| Whether Board’s action violates separation of powers by altering judicial sentence | Gray: Recalculation and denial of credit impermissibly alter a judicial sentence. | Board: Recommitment and credit determinations are within Board authority under precedent. | Court: Held no separation-of-powers violation; Supreme Court and appellate precedent permit Board action. |
| Whether custody time should be credited to original sentence because Board detainer was sole reason for custody | Gray: He was held on Board detainer, so pretrial custody should credit original sentence. | Board: Gray did not post bail; custody resulted from both new charges and detainer, so time credits to new sentence. | Court: Held custody was not solely due to detainer; time credited to new sentence was proper. |
| Whether claims about time at CEC/first approved residence should be considered on appeal | Gray: Time at CEC/residence should count as custody for credit to original sentence (raised first in this Court). | Board: Issue was not raised below and is waived. | Court: Held claim waived; will not address because not raised before Board. |
Key Cases Cited
- Armbruster v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 919 A.2d 348 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007) (parolee who received credit as TPV, was reparoled, then recommitted as CPV loses credited street time)
- Houser v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 682 A.2d 1365 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1996) (parolee recommitted as CPV may be denied credit for prior street time earned before TPV)
- Young v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 409 A.2d 843 (Pa. 1979) (Board’s denial of street-time credit is not an encroachment on judicial sentencing power)
- Gaito v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 412 A.2d 568 (Pa. 1980) (distinguishes custody credit: if held solely on Board detainer credit original sentence; if held on new charges credit new sentence)
- Davidson v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 33 A.3d 682 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2011) (affirming that recommitment without street-time credit does not violate separation of powers)
- McCaskill v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 631 A.2d 1092 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1993) (issues not raised before the Board are waived on appeal)