Wolcott v. Norton, Civ. A. No. B-604.

CourtUnited States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Connecticut)
Writing for the CourtAndrew B. Bowman, Asst. U. S. Atty., Bridgeport, Conn., for respondent
Citation365 F. Supp. 138
PartiesRobert John WOLCOTT v. John J. NORTON, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution, Danbury, Connecticut.
Docket NumberCiv. A. No. B-604.
Decision Date08 January 1973

365 F. Supp. 138

Robert John WOLCOTT
v.
John J. NORTON, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution, Danbury, Connecticut.

Civ. A. No. B-604.

United States District Court, D. Connecticut.

January 8, 1973.


365 F. Supp. 139

Robert John Wolcott, pro se.

Andrew B. Bowman, Asst. U. S. Atty., Bridgeport, Conn., for respondent.

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

NEWMAN, District Judge.

The petitioner, presently serving an eighteen-month sentence at the Federal Correctional Institution at Danbury, Connecticut, seeks to obtain credit for time spent in state custody during the pendency of federal parole violator charges against him.1

On November 18, 1969, the petitioner, who had been serving a five-year sentence for interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle, was mandatorily released from federal custody and placed under parole supervision, which was to last until May 1, 1971. On March 11, 1970 he was arrested by New York state authorities in Nassau County and charged with possession of stolen property. The same day, the Nassau County court denied petitioner bail in connection with this charge, basing its decision solely on the ground that a federal parole violator warrant had been issued for him. In fact, the warrant did not issue until March 12, when it was lodged as a detainer against petitioner, but federal authorities, informed on March 11 of petitioner's arrest, apparently indicated to the state court on that date that the warrant would be immediately forthcoming. The Government concedes that the state judge based his denial of bail on the existence of the federal parole violator charges, even though the federal warrant formalizing the charges was not issued until the following day.

The petitioner pled guilty to the state charges on June 8, 1970, and was sentenced on July 28, 1970, to one year in Nassau County Jail, the sentence to be computed as beginning on March 11. The petitioner had been held in state custody continuously from that date until the date of sentence.

Wolcott was released from Nassau County Jail on January 4, 1971, having received sixty-five days good time, and apparently was taken into federal custody on this date. On January 11, 1971, at a hearing before the United States Parole Board at the Federal House of Detention in New York City, the petitioner's parole was revoked, and he was ordered to serve the remainder of his term of seventeen months and nineteen days. During this period of incarceration, on October 26, 1971, the petitioner was sentenced to an additional eighteen months consecutive term for escape, which he is presently serving.

Petitioner contends that the period in state custody from March 11, 1970, to July 28, 1970, should be viewed as time spent in jail awaiting...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 practice notes
  • Peterson v. New York State Dept. of Correctional Services
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • March 12, 1984
    ...cert. den. 441 U.S. 934, 99 S.Ct. 2056, 60 L.Ed.2d 662; Siegel v. United States, 436 F.2d 92, 95 [2 Cir.1970]; Wolcott v. Norton, 365 F.Supp. 138, affd. 487 F.2d 513 [2 Cir.1973] ). In other words, if the detainer alone is not the cause of the inmate's detention, the credit is denied (e.g.,......
  • State v. Blondin, No. 94-048
    • United States
    • Vermont United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • July 28, 1995
    ...prison by four months. That, and no more, is what Doyle is due under section 3568. Id. at 515 (emphasis added); see Wolcott v. Norton, 365 F.Supp. 138, 140 (D.Conn.1973) (Congress did not intend § 3568 to credit state pretrial detention time toward state sentence and again toward underlying......
  • Standard Packaging Corporation v. Curwood, Inc., No. 72 C 3003.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • October 18, 1973
    ...or unpredictable nature of depositing a nylon of higher melting point on a polyethylene substrate film of lower melting point? 365 F. Supp. 138 Question 10: Mr. Litman, when you allowed the Coyle et al. application for patent, on what facts did you Question 11: Mr. Litman, was there some pa......
  • State v. Morrick, No. 88-0128-CR
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
    • October 20, 1988
    ...authority on the interpretation of sec. 973.155. We believe they dictate the result in this case as well. In Wolcott v. Norton, 365 F.Supp. 138 (D.Conn.), aff'd 487 F.2d 513 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1114, 94 S.Ct. 846, 38 L.Ed.2d 742 (1973), the defendant spent time in state custod......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
  • Peterson v. New York State Dept. of Correctional Services
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • March 12, 1984
    ...cert. den. 441 U.S. 934, 99 S.Ct. 2056, 60 L.Ed.2d 662; Siegel v. United States, 436 F.2d 92, 95 [2 Cir.1970]; Wolcott v. Norton, 365 F.Supp. 138, affd. 487 F.2d 513 [2 Cir.1973] ). In other words, if the detainer alone is not the cause of the inmate's detention, the credit is denied (e.g.,......
  • State v. Blondin, No. 94-048
    • United States
    • Vermont United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • July 28, 1995
    ...prison by four months. That, and no more, is what Doyle is due under section 3568. Id. at 515 (emphasis added); see Wolcott v. Norton, 365 F.Supp. 138, 140 (D.Conn.1973) (Congress did not intend § 3568 to credit state pretrial detention time toward state sentence and again toward underlying......
  • Standard Packaging Corporation v. Curwood, Inc., No. 72 C 3003.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • October 18, 1973
    ...or unpredictable nature of depositing a nylon of higher melting point on a polyethylene substrate film of lower melting point? 365 F. Supp. 138 Question 10: Mr. Litman, when you allowed the Coyle et al. application for patent, on what facts did you Question 11: Mr. Litman, was there some pa......
  • State v. Morrick, No. 88-0128-CR
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
    • October 20, 1988
    ...authority on the interpretation of sec. 973.155. We believe they dictate the result in this case as well. In Wolcott v. Norton, 365 F.Supp. 138 (D.Conn.), aff'd 487 F.2d 513 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1114, 94 S.Ct. 846, 38 L.Ed.2d 742 (1973), the defendant spent time in state custod......
  • 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