Gildea v. Commissioner of Correction

Decision Date08 May 1957
Citation142 N.E.2d 400,336 Mass. 48
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
PartiesThomas J. GILDEA v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION and others.

John M. Reed, Boston (Alette E. Reed, Boston, with him), for plaintiff.

Arnold H. Salisbury, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Fred L. True, Jr., Georgetown, with him), for defendants.

Before WILKINS, C. J., and SPALDING, WILLIAMS, COUNIHAN and WHITTEMORE, JJ.

WILLIAMS, Justice.

This is a bill in equity filed on August 27, 1956, by a prisoner in Massachusetts Correctional Institution, Walpole, formerly called the State prison, under G.L. (Ter.Ed.) c. 231A, praying that 's. 129 of c. 127 of the General Laws as it is now and has been in effect be construed in its application to * * * [the plaintiff], particularly with respect' to a forfeiture by the parole board in January, 1956, of certain good conduct credits accumulated by the plaintiff before October 20, 1955. The commissioner of correction and the members of the parole board are joined as defendants.

The case is before us on reservation and report by a single justice without decision, upon the pleadings and a stipulation by the parties filed on December 10, 1956, respecting computations by the parole board of deductions credited to the plaintiff on its records. By a second stipulation dated February 5, 1957, submitted at the time of oral argument, it appears that the plaintiff was released on parole on January 31, 1957, and because of that parole certain changes were made in the board's computations of credits.

It is agreed that on June 9, 1932, the plaintiff was sentenced to four consecutive terms of imprisonment of from five to eight years; that on May 7, 1935, he escaped from prison and was returned on May 9, 1935; that on June 8, 1944, he was paroled and was returned to prison on January 1, 1948, pursuant to a revoke warrant issued on October 27, 1947; and that on June 30, 1948, he was again paroled and returned to prison on July 29, 1955, pursuant to a revoke warrant issued on November 18, 1953. The revoke warrants were issued for violations of the conditions of his paroles.

From the computations of the board, which are agreed to be mathematically correct, it appears that at the time the sentences aggregating a maximum of thirty-two years were imposed the plaintiff's discharge date was reckoned to be June 8, 1964. Thereafter he was debited with so called 'lost' time amounting to six hundred ninety-two days which resulted from his escape and violations of parole. The addition of this 'lost' time to the original terms of sentence deferred the prospective date of discharge to May 1, 1966.

The maximum term which the plaintiff was required to serve was subject to reduction by deductions or credits authorized by statute for faithful observance of prison rules and for satisfactory performance of assigned work, the rights to which were essential elements of the sentences. Opinion of Justices, 13 Gray 618; Lembersky v. Parole Board of Department of Correction, 332 Mass. 290, 294, 124 N.E.2d 521. Previous to October 20, 1955, under G.L. (Ter.Ed.) c. 127, § 129, as appearing in St.1948, c. 450, § 1, as amended by St.1954, c. 567, § 4, the plaintiff while confined was entitled to earn a deduction of six days each month for good conduct and of four days each month for satisfactory work. While on parole if he faithfully observed all the rules of his parole and was not returned to prison for the violation of his parole he was also entitled to deductions for good conduct determined in the same manner as if he had not been released on parole, but not to deductions for satisfactory work. If he was returned to prison for violation of his parole the parole board was authorized to determine what...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Nolan v. Scafati, 7538.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • 14 Agosto 1970
    ... ... Mass.Gen.Laws Ann., ch. 127, § 129; see Gilda v. Commissioner of Correction, 336 Mass. 48, 49, 142 N.E.2d 400 (1957); Lembersky v. Parole Board, etc., 332 Mass ... ...
  • Franklin Fair Ass'n v. Secretary of Com.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 28 Febrero 1964
    ...of Ins., 334 Mass. 108, 134 N.E.2d 423; Winch v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 334 Mass. 271, 135 N.E.2d 17; Gildea v. Commissioner of Correction, 336 Mass. 48, 142 N.E.2d 400; Stow v. Commissioner of Corps. & Taxn., 336 Mass. 337, 145 N.E.2d 720; Sun Oil Co. v. Director of the Div. on the N......
  • Greenfield v. Scafati
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • 8 Diciembre 1967
    ...is contained in the statute, but prior to ch. 884 no forfeiture was provided for violation of parole. Gildea v. Commissioner of Correction, 1957, 336 Mass. 48, 142 N.E.2d 400. The availability of good conduct deductions is considered an essential element of the sentence. Murphy v. Commonwea......
  • Higgins v. Robbins
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • 28 Abril 1970
    ...criminal sentences and their incidents, where other prerequisites of granting such relief are present. See Gildea v. Commissioner of Correction, 336 Mass. 48, 51, 142 N.E.2d 400 (erroneous computation of good behavior deduction); Brown v. Commissioner of Correction, 336 Mass. 718, 147 N.E.2......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT