Opinion
[H.C. No. 55, October Term, 1956.]
Decided February 7, 1957.
CRIMINAL LAW — Time Spent on Parole — Credit for, Discretionary — No Deprivation of Constitutional Rights. The action of the Board of Parole and Probation in denying a prisoner credit for time spent on parole is one within its discretion, and there were no circumstances shown in this habeas corpus proceeding to make its action reviewable. The failure of the Board to exercise its discretion to grant such credit did not deprive petitioner of any constitutional rights, even assuming that the issue could be raised on habeas corpus. p. 638
J.E.B.
Decided February 7, 1957.
Habeas corpus proceeding by Rodney W. Schwartz against the Warden of the Maryland House of Correction. From a refusal of the writ, petitioner applied for leave to appeal.
Application denied, with costs.
Before BRUNE, C.J., and COLLINS, HENDERSON, HAMMOND and PRESCOTT, JJ.
This is an application by Rodney W. Schwartz for leave to appeal from the denial of a writ of habeas corpus by Judge D.K. McLaughlin of the Circuit Court for Washington County.
Petitioner was convicted and sentenced to three years in the Maryland House of Correction for burglary and larceny and later sentenced to six months additional for escape. He was afterwards placed on parole until December 20, 1955, and on January 4, 1956, he was given a hearing for violation of parole and returned to the House of Correction.
Petitioner contends that he should have been given credit on his sentence for time spent on parole. The action of the Board in denying him credit for time spent on parole was one within its discretion and there are no circumstances here shown to make its action reviewable. The failure of the Board to exercise its discretion to grant credit for time spent on parole does not deprive petitioner of any constitutional rights, even if we assume, without deciding, that such an issue could be raised on habeas corpus. Forrester v. Warden, 207 Md. 622, 114 A.2d 44; Williams v. Warden, 209 Md. 627, 120 A.2d 184; Creager v. Warden, 211 Md. 649, 127 A.2d 135.
Application denied, with costs.