Summary
In Vergari v Ward (60 A.D.2d 949) a unanimous court said: "this court has only recently held that time served on prior undischarged sentences made concurrent by a sentencing court with a new sentence is to be credited in computing the completion date of the minimum sentence for purposes of parole eligibility (People ex rel. Ternaku v Lefevre, 58 A.D.2d 932). "
Summary of this case from Witteck v. Superintendent, Wallkill Correctional FacilityOpinion
January 19, 1978
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered January 14, 1977 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, seeking to compel respondents to recompute the parole eligibility dates of four persons incarcerated in State correctional facilities. The petitioner contends that as a matter of law the respondents erred in computing the parole eligibility dates of multiple offenders by crediting them with time served on a prior undischarged sentence for purposes of the minimum period of a newly imposed concurrent sentence (Penal Law, § 70.30, subd 1, par [a]; § 70.25, subd 1). While petitioner characterizes the credit of time served on prior sentences in computing the minimum served on a subsequent concurrent sentence as "preposterous", we affirm for the reasons set forth by Special Term in its decision (Matter of Vergari v Ward, 88 Misc.2d 911). In addition, this court has only recently held that time served on prior undischarged sentences made concurrent by a sentencing court with a new sentence is to be credited in computing the completion date of the minimum sentence for purposes of parole eligibility (People ex rel. Ternaku v LeFevre, 58 A.D.2d 932). Judgment affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J.P., Kane, Main, Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur. [ 88 Misc.2d 911.]