L. Jones v. PA BPP
L. Jones v. PA BPP - 1149 C.D. 2015
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | Feb 28, 2017Background
- Louis Jones was paroled from an original sentence (max date April 15, 2013), later convicted of a new robbery offense, and recommitted as a convicted parole violator (CPV).
- The Board first recommitted Jones in 2005 for 24 months backtime (new max December 18, 2014); he was reparoled, completed that term, and returned to parole on the original sentence in April 2012.
- Arrested October 18, 2013, and later convicted of robbery (guilty plea July 24, 2014; sentenced Sept. 3, 2014), Jones remained in DOC custody on the Board detainer starting September 3, 2014.
- The Board held a revocation hearing and on May 11, 2015 recommitted Jones as a CPV for 36 months backtime, denied credit for time at liberty on parole, credited 104 days of confinement on the Board warrant, and recalculated his max date to April 25, 2021.
- Jones administratively appealed claiming the Board took "street time" improperly and miscalculated reparole eligibility and also later argued the Board imposed an illegal contract; the Board denied relief and this Court reviewed the appeal.
- Counsel filed a Turner no‑merit letter and sought to withdraw; the Court found procedural compliance and conducted independent review before affirming the Board and granting withdrawal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Board impermissibly extended Jones' judicially imposed sentence by recalculating max date and denying credit for time on parole | Jones: Board unlawfully extended his sentence by forfeiting street time and altering original max/min dates | Board: Under 61 Pa. C.S. § 6138(a)(2), a CPV forfeits time at liberty; Board may reenter parolee to serve remainder of original term | Held: Board acted within authority; denying credit for street time and recalculating max date was lawful (affirmed) |
| Whether parole "conditions" created an illegal contract permitting unlawful sentence extension as punishment for parole violation | Jones: He was compelled to sign an illegal contract that authorized unlawful extension of sentence | Board: The Conditions Governing Parole merely informed Jones of lawful consequences; no contract authorized illegal action | Held: Issue waived for appellate review and, on merits, without merit — no illegal contract existed |
Key Cases Cited
- Gaito v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 412 A.2d 568 (Pa. 1980) (Board may deny credit for time on parole and require parolee to serve unexpired balance)
- Richards v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. and Parole, 20 A.3d 596 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2011) (when recommitted as CPV for criminal conviction, maximum date may be extended to account for all street time)
- McCaskill v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. and Parole, 631 A.2d 1092 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1993) (issues not raised before the Board are waived on appeal)
- Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009) (standard for independent appellate review when counsel seeks withdrawal via no‑merit letter)