People ex rel. Oldroyd v. McDonnell
| Decision Date | 23 February 1956 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York ex rel. William OLDROYD, Relator, v. Thomas McDONNELL, Warden of the Penitentiary of the City of New York, Rikers Island, New York, Defendant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
William B. Oldroyd, pro se.
Daniel V. Sullivan, Dist. Atty., County of Bronx, New York City (Milton Altschuler and Joseph Tiger, Asst. Dist. Attys., New York City, of counsel), for defendant.
On this application for a writ of habeas corpus, the relator contends that he is being illegally detained in prison. The relator presented no proof. Insofar as I can gather the facts from the records produced by the defendant, it appears that the relator had spent eighty-two days in prison awaiting trial and sentence; that on December 18, 1950, he was sentenced to the New York City Penitentiary for an indeterminate sentence, not to exceed three years, Correction Law, Article 7-A, as the result of a plea of guilty to attempted grand larceny in the second degree; and that, when sentenced, the court recommended two years' incarceration.
By this writ two issues are raised for determination. First, is the Parole Commission bound by the sentencing court's recommendation that the relator be incarcerated for two years; and second, is the relator entitled as a matter of right to credit for time spent in jail prior to commitment?
Section 203(b) of the Correction Law expressly provides that the 'court in imposing sentence shall not fix or limit the term of imprisonment of any person sentenced' to the New York City Penitentiary, and that the term shall be determined by the Parole Commission as prescribed by Section 204 and that it shall not exceed three years. Under these sections, the function of the sentencing court is to determine whether or not the defendant is capable of receiving substantial benefit by commitment to a correctional and reformatory institution, and it is the function of the Parole Commission to determine when the prisoner is sufficiently rehabilitated or reformed to be fit to return to society. The sentencing court's recommendation as to length of imprisonment is not binding upon the Parole Commission. People v. Tower, 308 N.Y. 123, 123 N.E.2d 805; see also People ex rel. Gordon v. Ashworth, 290 N.Y. 285, 49 N.E.2d 140.
On the second point, it appears that the Parole Commission determined, on March 1, 1951, that, on the basis of the 'merit marks assigned' to the relator, he would be eligible for parole twenty-four months from the date of commitment, and that the time spent in jail prior to commitment had been considered when the marks were recommended in this case to the sentencing court and that such recommendation was approved. Pursuant thereto, and with additional time being allowed for good conduct see industry, the relator was released on parole on August 12, 1952, see Correction Law, § 204(a)(2). Thereafter, on separate occasions the relator was reincarcerated for violation of parole,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Berg's Estate, In re
...the statute in effect at the time such investments are made. (Matter of Sanford, Sup., 149 N.Y.S.2d 500; People ex rel. Oldroyd v. McDonnell, 1 Misc.2d 1055, 149 N.Y.S.2d 497; Matter of Kline, 21 Misc.2d 297, 193 N.Y.S.2d 24.) Concurring, as it does in this view, the court holds that the in......
-
MacPherson v. MacPherson
... ... Brewer, Dom.Rel.Ct., 24 N.Y.S.2d 6, in this instance the client never knew the name of her ... ...
-
People ex rel. Brady v. Warden of Queens House of Detention
...of the City of New York, 172 Misc. 423, 15 N.Y.S.2d 267, affirmed 259 App.Div. 804, 19 N.Y.S.2d 1019 and People ex rel. Oldroyd v. McDonnell, 1 Misc.2d 1055, 149 N.Y.S.2d 497, 499. The apparent reason for not crediting a prisoner with time spent in confinement where he is sentenced under Ar......