Court Opinion

ID: 9399229
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-02 15:09:15.80358+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:48.784535
License: Public Domain

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Eugene Pratt,                            :
                   Petitioner            :
                                         :   No. 598 C.D. 2022
            v.                           :
                                         :   Submitted: February 3, 2023
Pennsylvania Parole Board,               :
                  Respondent             :

BEFORE:     HONORABLE PATRICIA A. McCULLOUGH, Judge
            HONORABLE ANNE E. COVEY, Judge
            HONORABLE STACY WALLACE, Judge

OPINION NOT REPORTED

MEMORANDUM OPINION
BY JUDGE McCULLOUGH                                  FILED: June 2, 2023

            Eugene Pratt (Pratt) petitions for review of the May 18, 2022 decision of
the Pennsylvania Parole Board (Board) denying his request for recalculation of his
maximum sentence date established by the Board’s recommitment decision mailed
March 4, 2022. Upon review, we grant the Board’s Application to Dismiss for
Mootness (Application to Dismiss) and dismiss Pratt’s Petition for Review as moot.
                   I.    FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
            On December 8, 2020, Pratt was released on parole, with a maximum
sentence date of May 2, 2022. (Certified Record (C.R.) at 12.) On March 16, 2021,
Pratt was detained and subsequently recommitted for violating conditions of his parole.
(C.R. at 26-82.) Pratt was released again on August 11, 2021, with a maximum
sentence date of June 10, 2022. (C.R. at 174.)
             On November 9, 2021, the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections
issued a “Wanted Notice Request” after Pratt moved from his approved residence and
failed to report to parole supervision staff. (C.R. at 94.) On November 15, 2021, the
Board declared Pratt delinquent, effective November 5, 2021. (C.R. at 95.) Pratt was
declared delinquent until December 14, 2021, when he was detained by parole
supervision staff and charged with technical parole violations. (C.R. at 96-101.) A
parole violation hearing was conducted on February 22, 2022. (C.R. at 115-54.) At
the hearing, Pratt testified that he was seeking treatment for drug use as an inpatient at
Angel’s Light from November 26, 2021, until he was detained by the Board on
December 14, 2021. (C.R. at 136.) Pratt further testified that he had his wife contact
his probation agent to inform him that Pratt was at Angel’s Light seeking treatment.
(C.R. at 138-39.)
             On March 4, 2022, the Board mailed its decision, which recommitted Pratt
as a technical parole violator and recalculated his maximum sentence date to be June
10, 2022. (C.R. at 174-75.) Pratt, pro se, filed a request for administrative remedies
form which the Board received on March 16, 2022, requesting credit for time spent at
Angel’s Light. (C.R. at 176.) Additionally, Pratt’s counsel filed an administrative
remedies form, received by the Board on March 21, 2022, and dated March 18, 2022,
setting forth the same request that Pratt be credited for time spent at Angel’s Light.
(C.R. at 178-79.) Both requests for administrative relief were denied on May 18, 2022.
(C.R. at 187-88.)
             Pratt filed a petition for review with this Court on June 16, 2022. The
Board filed an Application to Dismiss for Mootness and Stay the Briefing Schedule,
requesting that this Court dismiss Pratt’s petition for review as moot. Pratt filed an
answer to the Board’s motion on September 26, 2022. By an order dated September

                                            2
29, 2022, the Court directed that the Application to Dismiss be decided with the merits
of the Petition for Review and denied the request to stay the briefing schedule.
                                    II.    DISCUSSION
              On appeal,1 Pratt presents the single question of whether the Board erred
in recalculating his maximum sentence date by failing to credit him for time he spent
at the inpatient treatment facility, Angel’s Light, from November 26, 2021, to
December 14, 2021. (Petitioner’s Br. at 5.)
              Alternatively, the Board asserts Pratt’s challenge to the recalculation
should be dismissed as moot because Pratt has served the entirety of his sentence.
(Respondent’s Br. at 6.) Should this Court not find this case moot, the Board argues
that Pratt is not entitled to credit for time he was delinquent pursuant to Section
6138(c)(2) of the Prisons and Parole Code, 61 Pa. C.S. §6138(c)(2). (Respondent’s Br.
at 6-8.)
              As this Court has previously held, “the expiration of a parolee’s maximum
term renders an appeal of a Board revocation order moot. It is well settled that an
appeal will be dismissed when the occurrence of an event renders it impossible for the
court to grant the requested relief.” Taylor v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation &
Parole, 746 A.2d 671, 674 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2000) (citations omitted). We will refuse to
dismiss a moot appeal “only if the issues involved are capable of repetition yet likely
to evade review[,] of important public interest, or where a party will suffer some
detriment without [our] court’s decision.” Id.

       1
          Review of a Board order is limited to determining whether constitutional rights were
violated, errors of law were committed, or findings of fact were not supported by substantial
evidence. Morgan v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole, 814 A.2d 300, 302 (Pa. Cmwlth.
2003).

                                              3
              Here, there is no dispute that Pratt’s maximum sentence date expired on
June 10, 2022. There is nothing in the Certified Record to indicate that Pratt committed
any additional crimes or had new charges that could extend his maximum sentence date
on his original sentence. To the contrary, it appears Pratt is no longer under the custody
and control of the Commonwealth. Because Pratt has already served the sentence that
extended his maximum sentence date, we cannot grant the requested relief. Although
the issue raised by Pratt relating to credit for time spent at an inpatient center is capable
of repetition, it is an issue this Court has routinely addressed. Moreover, Pratt will not
suffer some detriment without this Court’s decision because he is no longer serving his
original sentence. Because the maximum sentence date of June 10, 2022, on Pratt’s
original sentence has passed and there is no evidence in the record indicating that he is
under the custody and control of the Commonwealth, the instant appeal is moot.
See Santangelo v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole (Pa. Cmwlth., No. 1338
C.D. 2019, filed Mar. 17, 2021), slip op. at 5 (dismissing petitioner’s appeal as moot
as the issues presented in the appeal will continue to be addressed by the Court and
petitioner would suffer no detriment without this Court’s decision as the maximum
sentence for parole had elapsed);2 Davis v. Pennsylvania Parole Board (Pa. Cmwlth.,
No. 861 C.D. 2020, filed Feb. 15, 2022), slip op. at 6 (dismissing petitioner’s appeal as
moot because his maximum sentence time expired meaning he would suffer no
detriment without this Court’s decision and the recalculation issue will not evade
review in the future).

       2
          Pursuant to Commonwealth Court Internal Operating Procedures Section 414(a), 210 Pa.
Code §69.414(a), an unreported decision of this Court is not binding precedent but may be cited for
its persuasive value.

                                                4
            Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, we grant the Board’s
Application to Dismiss and dismiss Pratt’s Petition for Review as moot.

                                          ________________________________
                                          PATRICIA A. McCULLOUGH, Judge

                                         5
            IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Eugene Pratt,                          :
                  Petitioner           :
                                       :    No. 598 C.D. 2022
            v.                         :
                                       :
Pennsylvania Parole Board,             :
                  Respondent           :

                                    ORDER

            AND NOW, this 2nd day of June, 2023, the Application for Relief filed
by the Pennsylvania Parole Board on September 17, 2022, is hereby GRANTED.
The petition for review filed by Petitioner Eugene Pratt is hereby DISMISSED as
MOOT.

                                           ________________________________
                                           PATRICIA A. McCULLOUGH, Judge