Opinion ID: 1761033
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The DOC is Applying HB 406 Retroactively.

Text: An argument could be made that the DOC did not apply HB 406 retroactively. Instead, as the Franklin Circuit Court seemed to conclude, the DOC merely applied HB 406 equally to all affected prisoners or parolees because the bill contains no express exclusions or limitations on the prisoners or parolees to which it applies. [33] However, all parties (including the DOC) seem to agree that the DOC is applying HB 406 retroactively. [34] And since HB 406 is a biennial budget bill, effective for only a two-year time period, then it logically follows that giving prisoners or parolees credit for time spent on parole before the effective date of that legislation is a retroactive act. BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY defines a retroactive law as [a] legislative act that looks backward or contemplates the past, affecting acts or facts that existed before the act came into effect. [35] Giving prisoners and parolees credit for time served on parole before the effective date of HB 406 fits nicely that definition since giving prisoners and parolees credit for something done before the act's effective date plainly affect[s] acts or facts that existed before the act came into effect. So we shall treat the DOC's interpretation of HB 406 as being retroactive in nature.