ROGER HERRINGTON v. STEVE BERRY, WARDEN OF LUTHER LUCKETT CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
RENDERED:
November 13, 1998; 2:00 p.m.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
C ommonwealth O f K entucky
C ourt O f A ppeals
NO.
1997-CA-003025-MR
ROGER HERRINGTON
v.
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM OLDHAM CIRCUIT COURT
HONORABLE DENNIS A. FRITZ, JUDGE
ACTION NO. 97-CI-000349
STEVE BERRY,
WARDEN OF LUTHER LUCKETT
CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX
APPELLEE
OPINION
AFFIRMING
** ** ** ** **
BEFORE:
GUDGEL, CHIEF JUDGE; GUIDUGLI AND MILLER, JUDGES.
MILLER, JUDGE: Roger C. Herrington brings this pro se appeal from
a September 8, 1997 order of the Oldham Circuit Court.
We
affirm.
While on parole for a crime committed in the
Commonwealth of Kentucky, appellant was convicted of a felony in
the state of New Mexico.
The Commonwealth lodged a detainer
against appellant for violating the terms of his parole.
Upon
completion of his New Mexico sentence, appellant was returned to
Kentucky and thereupon incarcerated.
Appellant then filed a
petition for declaratory judgment, seeking credit against his
Kentucky sentence for time spent imprisoned in New Mexico.
On
September 8, 1997, the circuit court denied appellant's petition
and dismissed the action.
This appeal followed.
Appellant contends that the circuit court committed
reversible error by denying his petition for declaratory
judgment.
Specifically, appellant contends that he is entitled
to credit his jail time in New Mexico against the sentence he is
now serving in Kentucky.
We disagree.
We are of the opinion
that this issue has been resolved in Rosenberg v. DeFew, Ky.
App., 862 S.W.2d 334 (1993).
Therein, the Court held that KRS
533.060 “requires that a parolee's sentence for crimes committed
while on parole run consecutively to any other sentence.”
(Emphasis supplied.) Id. at 335.
This, concluded the Rosenberg
Court, included a sentence for a crime committed in California
while on parole from Kentucky.
As such, we are of the opinion
that the circuit court did not commit reversible error by denying
appellant's petition for declaratory judgment.
We find no merit in appellant's contention that
Kentucky has somehow forfeited jurisdiction over him.
For the foregoing reasons, the order of the Oldham
Circuit Court is affirmed.
ALL CONCUR.
BRIEF FOR APPELLANT:
BRIEF FOR APPELLEE:
Roger Herrington, Pro Se
LaGrange, KY
Keith Hardison
Frankfort, KY
-2-
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.
