Opinion ID: 836201
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: the department of corrections and the parole board

Text: The Department of Corrections (DOC) calculates the new parole eligibility date of a parolee sentenced to a new term of imprisonment for a felony committed while on parole. The Parole Board has no discretion to grant parole until that date. The parties do not take issue with the practices of the DOC or the Parole Board. Understanding their functions is nevertheless critical to understanding the issue presented. In general, a prisoner becomes subject to the jurisdiction of the Parole Board after he has served a period of time equal to the minimum sentence imposed by the court.... MCL 791.234(1). A prisoner sentenced to consecutive terms of imprisonment, whether received at the same time or at any time during the life of the original sentence, is subject to the jurisdiction of the Parole Board when the prisoner has served the total time of the added minimum terms.... MCL 791.234(3). [2] Before June 1, 1988, MCL 768.7a(1) [3] provided for consecutive sentencing for prison escapees and persons who committed crimes while in prison. Under that provision and MCL 791.234(3), [4] the DOC had, for more than 40 years, computed the eligibility for parole of an inmate who commits a crime in prison or an escapee who commits a crime while escaped by adding the consecutive minimum terms of all the offenses for which he is incarcerated in state prison. Wayne Co. Prosecutor v. Dep't of Corrections, 451 Mich. 569, 579-580, 548 N.W.2d 900 (1996). In 1988, [5] the Legislature added current MCL 768.7a(2), which provides: If a person is convicted and sentenced to a term of imprisonment for a felony committed while the person was on parole from a sentence for a previous offense, the term of imprisonment imposed for the later offense shall begin to run at the expiration of the remaining portion of the term of imprisonment imposed for the previous offense. In Wayne Co. Prosecutor, we considered the prosecutor's argument that MCL 768.7a(2) impliedly repealed MCL 791.238(5) [6] and MCL 791.234(3) because the `remaining portion' clause of [MCL 768.7a(2)] ... require[d] parolees who commit crimes while on parole to first serve the maximum of the earlier sentence before beginning to serve the new sentence. Id. at 574, 548 N.W.2d 900. We rejected that argument. Instead, we concluded that MCL 768.7a(2) extended to parolees the same consecutive sentencing treatment to which prisoners who committed crimes while incarcerated and escapees were subjected under former MCL 768.7a(1). Id. at 577-578, 548 N.W.2d 900. We saw no indication that the Legislature intended to alter the DOC's longstanding method of sentence calculation, as the prosecutor urged. Id. at 580-581, 548 N.W.2d 900. We held that the remaining portion clause of [MCL 768.7a(2)] requires the offender to serve at least the combined minimums of his sentences, plus whatever portion, between the minimum and the maximum, of the earlier sentence that the Parole Board may, because the parolee violated the terms of parole, require him to serve. [ Id. at 584, 548 N.W.2d 900.] Thus, in Wayne Co. Prosecutor, we rejected the prosecutor's argument that MCL 768.7a(2) requires a parolee to serve his entire original maximum sentence, plus his new minimum sentence, before becoming eligible for parole, and held that the DOC's practice of calculating the new parole eligibility date, as mandated by MCL 791.234(3), was consistent with MCL 768.7a(2). As the parties acknowledge, neither the DOC nor the Parole Board has sentencing authority. The DOC calculates the prisoner's new parole eligibility date after sentencing. Under MCL 791.234(3), the Parole Board lacks jurisdiction over the prisoner until he reaches that new parole eligibility date. In general, a parolee will have already served his original minimum sentence, [7] so he will become parole eligible after serving his new minimum sentence. At that point, the Parole Board has jurisdiction to decide whether the prisoner is worthy of parole. MCL 791.234(3). The issue here is not the practices of the DOC or the Parole Board, but whether the sentencing court is required or authorized, under MCL 769.11b or as a matter of common law discretion, to grant defendant credit against his new minimum sentence for the time he served in jail following his arrest for the new offenses and before his sentencing for those offenses.