Opinion
December 29, 1942.
Appeal from Supreme Court.
The sole question involved is the amount of the reduction in time that the petitioner has received. His contention is that he should receive seventeen and one-half days for each month of the thirty-year sentence. The respondents contend that petitioner is entitled to ten days per month reduction of said sentence which is being credited in accordance with the Correction Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 43) of this State. Order appealed from affirmed upon the authority of Matter of Zaloom v. Martin ( 264 App. Div. 19). Crapser, Heffernan, Schenck and Foster, JJ., concur; Hill, P.J., concurs solely upon the ground that mandamus may not be resorted to in matters of this kind. The petitioner is entitled to a total of seventeen and one-half days per month as compensation and commutation. ( People ex rel. Hammond v. Martin, 261 App. Div. 648. ) [See post, p. 1029.]