Court Opinion

ID: 9793213
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:44:28.988805+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:03:57.244205
License: Public Domain

RABINOWITZ, Chief Justice,
with whom MATTHEWS, Justice, joins, concurring.
Although we concur in the result, Justice Matthews and I differ with the court’s reasoning. In our view, AS 33.20.040(a)1 is controlling.
AS 33.15.190 provides, m part, that A prisoner released on parole remains in the legal custody of the [parole] board until the expiration of the maximum term or terms to which he was sentenced, less good time allowances provided by law.” In our view, the phrase “good time allowances provided by law” is defined in AS 33.20.040(a).2 Thus, AS 33.20.040(a) limits the benefit of good time allowances to a prisoner already paroled to a maximum of 180 days.

. AS 33.20.040(a) provides:
A prisoner serving the term or terms for which he was sentenced less good time deductions shall be released unconditionally if there remains less than 180 days to serve under his sentence. If there remains more than 180 days to serve under his sentence a prisoner, upon release, shall be considered as if released on parole until the expiration of the maximum term or terms for which he was sentenced less 180 days.

. In Matter of Estate of Hutchinson, 577 P.2d 1074, 1075 (Alaska 1978), (footnote omitted) we stated, in part:
It is an established principle of statutory construction that all sections of an act are to be construed together so that all have meaning and no section conflicts with another. Further, where one section deals with a subject in general terms and another deals with a part of the same subject in a more detailed way, the two should be harmonized, if possible; but if there is a conflict, the specific section will control over the general.
See also 2A C. Sands, Sutherland Statutory Construction 51.02 (4th ed. 1973).