Welcome to the Prison Talk Online Community! Take a Minute and Sign Up Today!






Go Back   Prison Talk > U.S. REGIONAL FORUMS > TEXAS > Texas Parole, Probation & Release
Register Entertainment FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Notices

Texas Parole, Probation & Release All information & questions relating to parole, probation or release in Texas should be posted here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-27-2012, 12:58 PM
TxHawker's Avatar
TxHawker TxHawker is offline
Registered User
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 540
Thanks: 200
Thanked 847 Times in 279 Posts
Default Parole Rules for Stacked Sentences Suck.

My brother is serving the first of two, ten-year sentences which are stacked. He comes up for parole (for the second time) in a couple of months so he sent me his time sheet. TDCJ has him rated at a flat 20 years, rather than ten years, so his accumulated flat time, good time and work time are basically cut in half. If these numbers were based strictly on his current sentence, then the accumulated total would show that he's served 68% of his time. Instead it only shows 34%. I would think that this has some bearing on the viewpoint of the PB- seeing someone who has done almost 70% of their time instead of only 34%. And on top of that once he does make parole, he has to start the second sentence and loses all of his good time/work time (and go through the entire parole process AGAIN!) I think stacked sentences should be illegal. You shouldn't be punished twice for the same crime just because some hillbilly judge is up for reelection and wants to show that he's "Tough on Crime."
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 04-27-2012, 03:54 PM
Powerd2004's Avatar
Powerd2004 Powerd2004 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: May 2011
Location: TX, United States
Posts: 97
Thanks: 19
Thanked 17 Times in 15 Posts
Default

Well, my BF has stacked sentences also and he is up for his first parole hearing in December. He told me His parole will be for all 3 together...nothing separated like you are indicating here. But he could be totally wrong. All of this is so confusing. :-(
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-27-2012, 06:35 PM
CenTexLyn CenTexLyn is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: TX-US
Posts: 7,373
Thanks: 61
Thanked 4,337 Times in 2,588 Posts
Default

The IPO summary does not rely upon the percentages that appear on the time sheet given to an offender. It clearly illustrates that there is a stacked structure, what the offense(s) are that under current vote and how much time has been served ON THAT sentence. Time served on the second or subsequent sentence in a cumulative series is not even relevant to the equation.

The Board is not the one that made the decision to vote stacked sentences the way that they are processed. You need to focus your angst at the legislature that crafted the statutes MANY years ago AND also to the courts that held circa 1987 that what is now recognized as TDCJ as well as the Board cannot treat cumulative sentences in an additive manner. Until then, accepted practice by both agencies would be to add everything up and come up with a single date, not only for parole eligibility but also to create a date for mandatory supervision.

And if there is a stacked sentence, it is NOT being punished twice for the same crime. If one truly believed that there was a second sentence FOR THE SAME CONDUCT, then it would form the basis for a successful writ.

As to powerd2004, my guess is that it is a concurrent structure, not a cumulative series. The reality is that, aside from in-prison conduct that has been prosecuted and stacked per statute, there are NOT that many persons with stacked sentences.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-27-2012, 08:07 PM
Powerd2004's Avatar
Powerd2004 Powerd2004 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: May 2011
Location: TX, United States
Posts: 97
Thanks: 19
Thanked 17 Times in 15 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CenTexLyn
The IPO summary does not rely upon the percentages that appear on the time sheet given to an offender. It clearly illustrates that there is a stacked structure, what the offense(s) are that under current vote and how much time has been served ON THAT sentence. Time served on the second or subsequent sentence in a cumulative series is not even relevant to the equation.

The Board is not the one that made the decision to vote stacked sentences the way that they are processed. You need to focus your angst at the legislature that crafted the statutes MANY years ago AND also to the courts that held circa 1987 that what is now recognized as TDCJ as well as the Board cannot treat cumulative sentences in an additive manner. Until then, accepted practice by both agencies would be to add everything up and come up with a single date, not only for parole eligibility but also to create a date for mandatory supervision.

And if there is a stacked sentence, it is NOT being punished twice for the same crime. If one truly believed that there was a second sentence FOR THE SAME CONDUCT, then it would form the basis for a successful writ.

As to powerd2004, my guess is that it is a concurrent structure, not a cumulative series. The reality is that, aside from in-prison conduct that has been prosecuted and stacked per statute, there are NOT that many persons with stacked sentences.
Yes, it is concurrent. But it is for the same conduct. He didn't even know he had a first and second charge until he received the third charge that ultimately sent him to prison. They were building a good case against him.

I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean by 'successful writ'.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-27-2012, 08:25 PM
CenTexLyn CenTexLyn is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: TX-US
Posts: 7,373
Thanks: 61
Thanked 4,337 Times in 2,588 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Powerd2004 View Post
Yes, it is concurrent. But it is for the same conduct. He didn't even know he had a first and second charge until he received the third charge that ultimately sent him to prison. They were building a good case against him.

I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean by 'successful writ'.
It is not at all uncommon to have multiple sentences for the same general conduct running concurrently. But three concurrent sentences is VERY different from stacked sentences, which is what the OP was venting about.

With a stacked sentence, you must either be approved for parole or discharge the first sentence in a series before time calculations are even performed on the second sentence in the series. In other words, with three stacked sentences, you have to be approved twice for parole or discharge each of those sentences before you even BEGAN serving the third sentence.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-28-2012, 05:08 AM
Powerd2004's Avatar
Powerd2004 Powerd2004 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: May 2011
Location: TX, United States
Posts: 97
Thanks: 19
Thanked 17 Times in 15 Posts
Default

Ah,thank you for the clarification. Txhawk, it sounds like your situation is much worse than mine. I'm very sorry and I'll pray for the best for you. Have a good weekend.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:58 AM.
Copyright © 2001- 2013 Prison Talk Online
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Website Design & Custom vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media
Message Board Statistics