Case Name: The People of the State of New York ex rel. James Henry Spinks, Appellant, v. David R. Harris, as Superintendent of Green Haven Correctional Facility, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1981-04-09
Citations: 53 N.Y.2d 784
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York ex rel. James Henry Spinks, Appellant, v David R. Harris, as Superintendent of Green Haven Correctional Facility, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 53
Pages: 784–787

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York ex rel. James Henry Spinks, Appellant, v David R. Harris, as Superintendent of Green Haven Correctional Facility, Respondent.
Argued March 25, 1981;
decided April 9, 1981
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Richard C. Schisler for appellant.
Robert Abrams, Attorney-General (Burton Herman and Shirley Adelson Siegel of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the application for a writ of habeas corpus granted.
On August 26, 1978 relator was released from custody pursuant to an order of the Board of Parole. Release on that date was consistent with a certification made by the Department of Correctional Services that at that time relator would have completed service of his minimum term. Subsequently, however, some correctional employee, or employees, concluded that the Parole Board's order was based upon an erroneous computation and that relator should be returned to custody immediately and summarily. Thus apparently without informing the Board of Parole or seeking to have its release order vacated, correctional officers arrested relator at his home and returned him to prison in November of 1978.
In view of the fact that the Board of Parole issued an order authorizing the relator's release and that this order had not been withdrawn by the board, his arrest and incarceration is without any lawful basis in the record.
Accordingly, the application for a writ of habeas corpus should be granted and relator should be released on parole. This determination, however, is without prejudice to the right of the respondent or the Board of Parole to institute such proceedings or take such other action to correct the alleged error, as they may be advised.