Yates v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole
2012 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 164
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2012Background
- Yates appeals a Board denial of administrative relief from a recommitment as a technical parole violator.
- He was originally sentenced in 2001, paroled in 2002, and later recommitted for new crimes in 2003; he served backtime and was reparoled in 2004, with another parole in 2006.
- In 2007, Yates was arrested for new crimes and recommitted to 2003 sentence to serve backtime and additional backtime for a convicted violator; these terms were to be served concurrently.
- In 2010 the Board notified that he would be paroled from the 2007 sentence on or after 2/22/11 upon completion of programming in a violent prevention center.
- On January 25, 2011, he was arrested for a violation of Condition 7; he admitted the violation on January 31, 2011.
- In May 2011 the Board recommitted him as a technical violator to serve 9 months of backtime on the 2003 sentence when available, with a max date potentially in June 2011; the board later amended the notice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Yates was unavailable to serve backtime on the 2003 sentence until completion of the 2007 sentence | Yates argues he completed minimum term before 2011, thus should serve backtime immediately. | Board contends Weyand controls; Yates was constructively paroled and detainer rules apply, delaying backtime. | Remanded for factual clarification; held that availability depends on minimum-term completion, unclear here. |
| Whether the 9 months of backtime exceeded the remaining 2003 sentence balance | Backtime should not exceed remaining unexpired term of the 2003 sentence. | Board acted within presumptive range and could recomit within that range. | Board erred by imposing 9 months; backtime must equal the unserved remainder (149 days). |
Key Cases Cited
- Weyand v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 94 Pa.Cmwlth. 32, 503 A.2d 80 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1986) (detainer sentence; constructively paroled; timing of backtime)
- Hines v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 420 A.2d 381 (Pa. 1980) (constructive parole; detainer concepts)
- Calloway v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 857 A.2d 218 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2004) (detainer and detainer sentence framework)
- Rivenbark v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 501 A.2d 1113 (Pa. 1985) (recommitment defined; serve remainder of original term)
- Savage v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 761 A.2d 643 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2000) (backtime cannot exceed remaining balance of unexpired term)
- Epps v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 565 A.2d 214 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1989) (board must clarify order on recommitment)
- Smith v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 574 A.2d 558 (Pa. 1990) (presumptive recommitment range threshold)