Opinion ID: 2311108
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Double Whammy

Text: According to the trial justice's decision, an inmate who is disciplined for bad conduct must deduct from his or her previously earned good time credits the amount of time during which he or she was actually disciplined, pursuant to § 42-56-24(c), but he or she can still earn good time credits for that month if he or she acts, with the exception of the punished bad behavior, in accordance with the rules and requirements of the prison. That conclusion is erroneous. Section 42-56-24(c), which requires that [f]or every day a prisoner shall be shut up or otherwise disciplined for bad conduct    there shall be deducted one day from the time he or she shall have gained for good conduct, must be read in conjunction with § 42-56-24(a), which only permits the award of good time credits for months in which the inmate appears by the record to have faithfully observed all the rules and requirements of the institutions and not to have been subjected to discipline. In accordance with that clear and unambiguous language in § 42-56-24(a), an inmate cannot receive good time credits for any month during which he or she is subjected to discipline. Additionally, § 42-56-24(c) requires that one day be deducted from already accumulated good time credits for each day of discipline for bad conduct. Thus, in addition to not accruing good time credits for the month in which the inmate was disciplined, the inmate must also deduct from his or her already accumulated good time credits the number of days during which the inmate was subjected to discipline. That does not amount to a double whammy, as asserted by the inmate-applicants, because, as we stated in Barber, so-called good time credit for good behavior while incarcerated is not a constitutional guarantee    but is instead an act of grace created by state legislation that may provide therein for the manner in which good time credits may be granted for compliance with, or revoked for violations of, prison rules and regulations. Barber, 682 A.2d at 914 (citing Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 557, 94 S.Ct. 2963, 2975, 41 L.Ed.2d 935, 951 (1974); Tuitt v. Fair, 822 F.2d 166, 180 (1st Cir. 1987)). The Legislature in § 45-56-24 clearly intended that an inmate would not be entitled to good time credits for a month in which he or she has been disciplined for bad conduct. The Legislature also deemed it necessary to provide for additional deterrent penalties to discourage inmate violation of prison rules and requirements, and in response to that need, it enacted subsection (c) of § 42-56-24. That subsection mandates that, in addition to not permitting an errant inmate to accumulate good time credits for a month in which the inmate exhibits bad conduct, the inmate, in addition, loses one day of already earned good time credits for each day the inmate is disciplined, to be deducted from the inmate's earlier accumulation of monthly credits. The clear and unambiguous language of § 42-56-24 precludes any other logical reading of the statute. Accordingly, the trial justice's interpretation of § 42-56-24 is erroneous, and the department's appeal on the so-called double whammy issue is therefore sustained.