Appeal from the Order of the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole in case of Ronald Cameron, Parole No. 4627M, dated November 4, 1983.
Ferris B. Webby, Assistant Public Defender, for petitioner.
Arthur R. Thomas, Assistant Chief Counsel, with him, Robert A. Greevy, Chief Counsel, Jay C. Waldman, General Counsel, and LeRoy S. Zimmerman, Attorney General, for respondent.
Judges Craig and Palladino, and Senior Judge Barbieri, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Palladino. Judge Williams, Jr. did not participate in the decision in this case.
[ 90 Pa. Commw. Page 581]
Ronald Cameron (Petitioner) appeals from a decision of the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole (Board) which recommitted him to serve thirty-six (36) months backtime as a convicted parole violator (CPV). We affirm.
Petitioner was paroled from the State Correctional Institution at Graterford (SCIG) on January 12, 1981, after serving four years of a four to ten year sentence for robbery. On May 21, 1981, Petitioner was arrested on federal charges of bank robbery. Petitioner was convicted on September 20, 1981 on federal charges of aiding and abetting a bank robbery and conspiracy to rob a bank, and on October 6, 1981 was sentenced to serve three years at the Federal Correctional Institute at Otisville, New York (Otisville). Petitioner was charged as a CPV by the Board, which issued a detainer, and on September 21, 1981 he waived
[ 90 Pa. Commw. Page 582]
a full Board revocation hearing. Because Petitioner was in federal custody, no action was taken by the Board on the CPV charge at this time.*fn1
Petitioner was paroled from Otisville on July 29, 1983 and was returned to SCIG. On September 1, 1983 Petitioner requested a full Board hearing on the CPV charge, which was held on October 26, 1983. Following this hearing the Board issued an order on November 4, 1983 recommitting Petitioner as a CPV for thirty-six (36) months, with a new parole date of January 26, 1987 and a new maximum date of July 29, 1989. The Board modified the language of this order on May 1, 1984, but did not alter the period of recommitment. This appeal followed.
Petitioner has presented three questions for our consideration:
1) Whether the Board's hearing on the CPV matter was untimely because it was held more than 120 days after Petitioner's ...