Opinion

Rodgers v. TDOC

Court
Court of Appeals of Tennessee
Filed
Jul 28, 2000
Status
Published
On the bench
Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 30.0%

The opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE

June 2000 Session, on Briefs

THOMAS RODGERS, v. TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Direct Appeal from the Chancery Court for Davidson County

No. 98-933-II Hon. Carol L. McCoy, Chancellor

No. M1999-02585-COA-R3-CV - Filed July 28, 2000

In this Declaratory Judgment plaintiff sought statutory credits on his prison sentences. The Trial

court granted the State summary judgment. On appeal, we affirm.

Tenn. R. App. P.3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court Affirmed.

HERSCHEL PICKENS FRANKS , J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which CHARLES D. SUSANO,

JR., J., and D. MICHEL SWINEY J., joined.

Thomas Rodgers, Nashville, pro se.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter and Abigail Turner, Assistant Attorney General,

for Respondent-Appellee, Tennessee Department of Corrections.

OPINION

Rodgers, has been incarcerated since 1975 and filed a declaratory judgment action

seeking statutory credits against his sentences, which are two consecutive life sentences for

armed robbery with a deadly weapon, and second degree murder.

The Trial Judge granted summary judgment to the State, and petitioner has

appealed.

When reviewing a grant of summary judgment, we are required to take the

strongest legitimate view of the evidence in favor of the non-moving party, allow all reasonable

inferences in favor of that party, and discard all countervailing evidence. Byrd v. Hall, 847

S.W.2d 208 (Tenn. 1993). Summary judgment is only proper where there are no genuine issues

of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Shadrick v.

Coker, 963 S.W.2d 726 (Tenn. 1998).

At the time of Rodgers’ offense (1975), the following statute was in effect:

[A]ny person who shall have been convicted and sentenced to a term of

sixty-five (65) years or more, or life, may become eligible for parole

provided such person shall have been confined or served a term in the state

penitentiary of not less than thirty (30) full calendar years . . ..

Tenn. Code Ann. §40-3613 (1975 Replacement).

This statute and the Supreme Court’s later decision in Slagle v. Reynolds, 845

S.W.2d 167 (Tenn. 1992), established that the earliest possible parole date would have been

2005.

Rodgers argues that he should have been awarded honor and good time credits to

reduce his parole eligibility date, pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 41-332 and 41-334, which

were in effect at the time of his offenses. We find this argument to be without merit because

good and honor time credits do not affect a prisoner’s parole eligibility date, but rather affect

only a prisoner’s ultimate release date. McFadden v. State, 532 S.W.2d 944 (Tenn. Crim. App.

1975); Howell v. State, 569 S.W.2d 428 (Tenn. 1978).

In 1985, the Sentence Reform Act was passed which established certain Prisoner

Sentence Reduction Credits, and any person who had been previously convicted of a felony could

opt into this system of credits by signing a waiver. Tenn. Code Ann. §41-21-236. Rodgers

executed such a waiver in April 1986, and since that time, he has been receiving credits toward

his parole eligibility date, such that that date was reduced from 2005 to 1999.

Rodgers asserts that he could have earned more credits and been paroled more

quickly under Tenn. Code Ann. §41-21-2291 than under Tenn. Code Ann. §41-21-236.

However, Tenn. Code Ann. §41-21-229 stated that the credits allowed thereunder were to be

applied the same way as good and honor time credits were applied previously. Accordingly, the

statute would not give Rodgers any credits toward his parole eligibility.

Finally, Rodgers asserts that he is entitled to mandatory parole pursuant to Tenn.

Code Ann. §40-3614, which stated:

1

This statute has been repealed.

-2-

Every prisoner who has never been granted a parole by the Board on a

particular sentence of imprisonment shall be mandatorily released to and

under the supervision of the division of probation and paroles subject to

the following restrictions:

...

2. Prisoners serving sentences with maximum terms of over ten (10) years shall

be released six (6) months prior to the completion of the maximum term of

sentence less all credits granted by law.

...

4. Said mandatory parole shall not be construed to grant parole

earlier than set forth in §§ 40-3612 – 40-3616. (Emphasis added.)

Since petitioner is serving two consecutive life sentences for second-degree

murder and armed robbery with a deadly weapon, this statute does not grant mandatory parole to

plaintiff, prior to his serving the time required by Tenn. Code Ann. 40-3613.

We affirm the judgment of the Trial Court, with costs assessed to appellant.

____________________________

HERSCHEL PICKENS FRANKS , J.

-3-

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.