Original jurisdiction in case of Commonwealth ex rel. Leroy R. Feflie v. The Attorney General of Pennsylvania, The Director of the Bureau of Probation and Parole, The District Attorney of Northampton County, and The Keeper of the Prison.
James D. Morris, for petitioner.
Glenn Gilman, Deputy Attorney General, with him J. Andrew Smyser, Deputy Attorney General, and Robert P. Kane, Attorney General, for respondent.
Judges Crumlish, Jr., Kramer and Rogers, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Rogers.
[ 29 Pa. Commw. Page 474]
Leroy Feflie, a prisoner serving sentence at the State Correctional Institution at Camp Hill, acting for himself, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus ad subjiciendum in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. The Supreme Court remanded the matter to this Court for appointment of counsel and disposition on the merits. The action, which we treat as a complaint in mandamus directed to the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole (Board), is within our original jurisdiction pursuant to Section 401(a) of the Appellate Court Jurisdiction Act of 1970, Act of July 31, 1970, P.L. 673, as amended, 17 P.S. § 211.401(a)(1).*fn1
[ 29 Pa. Commw. Page 475]
Presently before us are motions for summary judgment filed by both the petitioner Feflie and the respondent Board.
On December 9, 1973, Judge R. Grifo of the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County sentenced the petitioner to serve an indeterminate term, not to exceed five years, at the State Correctional Institution at Camp Hill (Camp Hill) for the offenses of burglary, larceny, receiving stolen goods and uttering a written instrument. Upon arrival at Camp Hill, the petitioner's maximum sentence was increased by one year when the Board recomputed his sentence under the terms of Sections 6 and 13 of the Act of April 28, 1887 (Youthful Offender Act), P.L. 63, as amended, 61 P.S. §§ 485, 486.
In November of 1974, after having served approximately one year of his sentence, Mr. Feflie was paroled. He remained on parole until October 15, 1975, when he was recommitted to Camp Hill upon discovery that he had violated one of the conditions of his parole by traveling outside the state without permission. The Board reinstated the petitioner's full sentence without crediting the time he had spent on parole.
Petitioner contends that the Youthful Offender Act, 61 P.S. §§ 481-486, as applied to him, violates his rights to the process and equal protection of the laws under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States by treating him in an impermissibly different and disadvantageous manner from others of the same class. In addition, he argues that these rights were specifically violated when the Parole Board recomputed his sentence.
Under Section 4 of the Youthful Offender Act, 61 P.S. § 483, a court exercising criminal jurisdiction, in lieu of sentence provided by law, may sentence individuals ...