Russell v. Annucci, 520059

Citation2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 06541,131 A.D.3d 772,14 N.Y.S.3d 821
Decision Date13 August 2015
Docket Number520059
PartiesIn the Matter of Frank F. RUSSELL, Appellant, v. Anthony J. ANNUCCI, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.
CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division

Frank F. Russell, Syracuse, appellant pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.

Before: PETERS, P.J., LAHTINEN, ROSE and LYNCH, JJ.

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Collins, J., entered September 26, 2014 in Albany County) which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision calculating petitioner's jail time credit.

In 1992, 1995 and 2003, petitioner was convicted, respectively, of the crimes of attempted assault in the second degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree. The indeterminate sentences for these crimes, ranging from 1 ½ to 3 years to 4 ½ to 9 years in prison, ran consecutively and, after they were imposed, petitioner was periodically released to parole supervision and later declared delinquent. He was finally restored to parole supervision on January 4, 2006, at which time the maximum expiration date of his 1992, 1995 and 2003 sentences was September 28, 2008.

While on parole, petitioner was convicted of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and, on March 9, 2007, he was sentenced as a second felony offender to concurrent prison terms of nine years, to be followed by 3 ½ years of postrelease supervision, which sentences were to run consecutively to his 1992, 1995 and 2003 sentences.1 He was declared delinquent and his parole was revoked as of March 9, 2007. Petitioner was received into the custody of the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (hereinafter DOCCS) on March 14, 2007. At such time, he was granted 374 days of jail time credit for the period that he was in local custody from March 7, 2006 to March 15, 2007, giving him a maximum expiration date for his 2007 crimes of March 6, 2015. After it was discovered that the time he spent in local custody from March 7, 2006 to March 9, 2007 had been credited toward his 1992, 1993 and 2003 sentences, the credit was reduced to seven days for the period March 9, 2007 to March 15, 2007, giving him a maximum expiration date for his 2007 crimes of March 8, 2016. Petitioner requested DOCCS to recalculate his jail time credit, but it concluded that his jail time credit was properly reduced. He commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding as a result and, following joinder of issue, Supreme Court dismissed the petition. This appeal ensued.

We affirm. Pursuant to Penal Law § 70.30(3), jail time credit shall not be applied against a subsequent sentence when it has already been applied toward time served on a previous sentence (see Matter of Santiago v. Germain, 121 A.D.3d 1479, 1480, 995 N.Y.S.2d 648 [2014] ; Matter of Blake v. Dennison, 57 A.D.3d 1137, 1138, 868 N.Y.S.2d 827 [2008], lv. denied 12 N.Y.3d 710, 881 N.Y.S.2d 660, 909 N.E.2d 583 [2009] ). Here, the record reveals that petitioner's 1992, 1995 and 2003 indeterminate sentences ran uninterrupted from the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Artibee v. Home Place Corp.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 13 Agosto 2015
    ...J. (concurring in part and dissenting in part).Although I agree that evidence of the State's wrongdoing, if any, is properly admissible 14 N.Y.S.3d 821at the trial of plaintiffs' negligence action in Supreme Court, I disagree with the majority as to defendant's entitlement to an apportionme......
  • Maldonado v. Howard
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 30 Marzo 2017
    ...N.Y.S.2d 312 [2006] [internal quotation marks, ellipses and citation omitted]; see Penal Law § 70.30[3] ; Matter of Russell v. Annucci, 131 A.D.3d 772, 773, 14 N.Y.S.3d 821 [2015] ). Petitioner argues that he should also receive jail time credit on the 2013 sentence for the time period from......
  • Tarafa v. Annucci
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 24 Diciembre 2015
  • Singleton v. Racette
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 24 Diciembre 2015
  • 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