Peo v. Soghigian, 23CA1028

Ben Robert Soghigian pleaded guilty in Colorado to several charges in four cases, resulting in an aggregate 16-year sentence to run concurrently with an ongoing Arizona prison sentence.
Numerous other charges and cases were dismissed as part of his plea agreement.
Soghigian remains incarcerated in Arizona and, in 2022, filed a pro se Crim. P. 35(c) motion (later supplemented by counsel) about Colorado's Department of Corrections (DOC) not reviewing his Arizona performance for earned time credits.
He argued that failure to review for earned time credits violated his statutory rights and his constitutional right to equal protection.
The postconviction court denied his motion, stating his claims were not cognizable under Crim. P. 35(c), as they attacked the DOC’s procedures rather than the sentence or the statute's constitutionality.
Soghigian appealed the denial, seeking an order requiring the DOC to comply with the earned time statutes.

Issue	Soghigian (Plaintiff) Argument	State (Defendant) Argument	Held
1. Whether DOC must review out-of-state prisoners' eligibility for earned time credits under Colorado law	DOC's failure to review his Arizona record is a statutory and constitutional violation	Proper avenue to challenge is a civil suit; Crim. P. 35(c) not applicable	Proper claim is a civil suit; Crim. P. 35(c) inapplicable
2. Whether his claim about earned time credits is cognizable under Crim. P. 35(c)	Challenges DOC’s noncompliance with statutory earned time review as constitutional issue	DOC’s administration of sentence isn't about the sentence imposed or statute’s validity	Crim. P. 35(c) relief not available for DOC’s administration
3. Whether Soghigian's claims require DOC as a necessary party	Seeks court order requiring DOC compliance	Only DOC can provide the relief requested; not part of 35(c) proceedings	DOC is a necessary party; claim must be against DOC
4. Whether abandonment of release claim affects 35(c) motion	Did not press any right to be released, just earned time review	35(c) limited to claims for release or to set aside conviction	No valid 35(c) ground; claim must be brought in civil action

Verrier v. Colo. Dep’t of Corr., 77 P.3d 875 (Colo. App. 2003) (earned time reviews are within DOC discretion)
Renneke v. Kautzky, 782 P.2d 343 (Colo. 1989) (DOC discretion over earned time credits)
Naranjo v. Johnson, 770 P.2d 784 (Colo. 1989) (Crim. P. 35(c) not applicable for parole or similar custody issues)