Alvin Rochelle, Jr. VS Louisiana Department of Public Safety & Corrections, Richard Stalder, Secretary
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NUMBER 2007 CA 0700 ALVIN ROCHELLE JR f 0J1Y1 1ty VERSUS LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY CORRECTIONS RICHARD STALDER SECRETARY Judgment Rendered Appealed December 21 2007 from the Nineteenth Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge Louisiana Docket Number 540 621 Honorable Alvin Rochelle Jr Timothy E Kelley Judge Presiding Plaintiff Appellant pro se St Gabriel LA William L Kline Counsel for Defendant Baton Richard Stalder Rouge LA Louisiana Safety BEFORE Appellee Secretary Department of Public Corrections WHIPPLE GUIDRY AND HUGHES JJ WHIPPLE J This is an the Louisiana from appeal by Alvin Rochelle Jr Department of Public Safety and Corrections of custody the DPSC judgment of the Nineteenth Judicial District Court dismissing his a petition for judicial review of his request for denying following reasons adverse decision from the DPSC and an administrative an Corrections Administrative F or the inmate in the an remedy the pursuant to 15 1171 LSA R S Remedy Procedure we filed et seq affinn FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On May 19 District Court to Thereafter on dimunition of and one a term of sentence half years later out 8 February custody of the serve Rochelle 1983 thirty 2001 good on DPSC for term the remainder of his release date Objecting reported on his administrative DPSC his s was Rochelle if as was on custody of the DPSC released from custody parole 29 2004 Rochelle sentence as to the to was recOlmnitted three which at the time of his release twenty nine days recalculated Approximately on of his 2001 release violating the conditions consisted of seventeen years and full five years in the time July sentenced in the Sixteenth Judicial was May 25 Accordingly Rochelle 202l to the modification and calculation of his release date master remedy prison record with the DPSC Rochelle filed Specifically computations contending that his good early release had not sentence good properly subtracted from his total sentence he would have should have ended on Thus March 2 actually he contended 2002 2 request for time credits emned averred that if his days of parole supervision credits and time a Accordingly as an Rochelle contested the been subtracted from his total time s the prior to He also served had been only owed 385 parole supervision Rochelle averred that his sentence was completed immediate release from After Rochelle as of March 2 2002 and that he his In incorrectly s for request a relief petition petition Rochelle again calculated his the time he had entitled to custody and monetary damages administrative level he then filed court was actually sentence for the at second judicial review in the district contended by failing served and denied was to that the add his DPSC had good time credits to il1llnediate release and again sought monetary damages In his recommendation monetary damages is LSA R S citing not the commissioner noted that properly 15 1177 C raised in and a thus a request for request for judicial review should be denied The commissioner further found that Rochelle had failed to show that the DPSC had improperly applied time credits earned by any an good inmate time credits in this matter applied are to calculate noting that good a proj ected good time release date but do not alter the full term date of any sentence the commissioner concluded entitled to relief any recommendation the district Rochelle had failed In accordance court rendered to with Thus show that he the was commissioner s Rochelle s judgment dismissing petition for judicial review with prejudice From this judgment Rochelle appeals DISCUSSION While contends on subtract his sentence DPSC s not specifically listing appeal that the good and that any prior to calculation of his proper alleged balance of seventeen further contends that he has of error DPSC miscalculated his sentence time credits earned a assignments a years and 3 by failing to his release from his full sentence controverts twenty nine days libeliy interest and Rochelle a the Rochelle propeliy interest in the f f good time credits he earned because they behavior but also as 2001 as police powers and if on arbitrary was due process violation his constituted earned not an and unreasonable Rochelle capricious constituting to his release person released 928 So Manuel 2d 24 26 of the original 00 v on sentence 762 So 2d 144 Frederick 149 governs revocation of when an inmate released reincarcerated for recommitted parole to the merit to this accumulated App 1st Cir 99 0616 2000 1811 to of tenns La on prior 12 22 05 12 4 length 1 App La st 01 Cir 789 provides that diminution of parole the sentence inmate for the remainder of the 15 571 5 B find Ieyoub parole due department LSA R S v if as Louisiana Revised Statute 15 571 5 which the term miscalculated it upon diminution of sentence on violating La or l time credits do not reduce the writ denied So 2d 581 LSA R S 15 571 5 procedures process was s forfeiture of diminution of sentence Stalder 2004 1920 Specifically good sentence good substantive a grant him immediate release is not entitled to restoration of good time earned parole 12 5 a court to argument that his s for legislature Rochelle also argues that the unlawful Accordingly Rochelle asks this is well settled that of the use good time credits was without benefit of specific due Regarding only Thus he contends that his release in compensation parole were is shall be original full Accordingly we argument no Moreover that this 1 court has with regard to C emphasis added Rochelle previously upheld the s due process arguments 4 note constitutionality and applicability We note that Rochelle has not raised the issue of monetary appeal we damages of in this LSA R S 15 571 5 under similar Board of Parole 2003 2093 writ denied 2004 2555 La challenges App 1st Cir La 6 24 05 at 147 148 and Howard So 2d 534 536 v See Ferrington 6 25 04 904 So Louisiana v 886 So 2d 455 459 2d 741 Frederick 762 So 2d Louisiana Board of Probation and Parole 589 App 1st Cir La 2 writ denied 590 So 2d 87 La 1991 These arguments also lack merit CONCLUSION Based upon LSA R S Rochelle our 15 1177 A we are denying Rochelle the t Thus 2 16 1 B for 9 we constitutional s Further e review of the administrative record and pursuant the judicial unable find no error of law or find that the DPSC requested relief was of the district court review is affinned arbitrary See LSA R S in accordance with Uniform Rules plaintiff Alvin Rochelle no violation of rights in the administrative decision of the to judgment fact and DPSC capricious 15 1177 A 9 a in d Courts of Appeal Rule dismissing Costs of this or to appeal Rochelle are s assessed petition against Jr AFFIRMED 2To procedures the extent that Rochelle argues that he was denied the benefit of specific set forth in LSA RS 15 571 4 we note that LSA RS 15 4 571 is applicable to situations where applies a to situations revocation of parole has occurred such as of sentence has been revoked So 2d 534 535 La App 1st R S 15 571 4 does not Rochelle Cir where s Howard v an In contrast LSA RS 15 571 5 early release because of diminution Louisiana Board of Probation and Parole 589 writ denied apply herein 5 590 So 2d 87 La 1991 Thus LSA
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
