42 N.Y.2d 191 (1977)
When a defendant receives multiple concurrent sentences, jail time credit is applied to each sentence, but time already credited to a previously imposed sentence cannot be credited again to a later sentence.
Summary
This case clarifies how jail time credit is calculated when a defendant receives multiple concurrent sentences at different times. The Court of Appeals held that while jail time generally applies to each concurrent sentence, time already credited to a previously imposed sentence cannot be credited again to a subsequent sentence. The court distinguished between time served before any sentence is imposed, which can be credited to a later sentence, and time served while already serving a sentence, which cannot be re-credited. The decision emphasizes the importance of the timing of sentences and the specific language of Penal Law § 70.30 in determining jail time credit.
Facts
Kalamis faced charges in three counties. On November 14, 1973, he was sentenced in Nassau County. On January 2, 1974, Suffolk County filed a warrant against him while he was in Nassau County jail. On January 16, 1974, he was sentenced in New York County, to run concurrently with the first sentence. On January 30, 1974, he was sent to Green Haven and then transferred to Clinton. On February 20, 1974, he was sent to Suffolk County jail and sentenced on December 9, 1974, to run concurrently with the prior sentences. The core dispute revolved around whether Kalamis should receive jail time credit against the Suffolk County sentence for the time spent in custody between January 2, 1974 (Suffolk warrant) and December 19, 1974 (return to state prison).
Procedural History
Kalamis initiated an Article 78 proceeding seeking jail time credit. The lower courts granted him credit for 28 days. Kalamis appealed, seeking additional credit. The Appellate Division affirmed in part. The New York Court of Appeals then reviewed the case to determine whether additional jail time credit was warranted.
Issue(s)
Whether the time spent in custody between the first sentence and a later concurrent sentence can be credited against the later sentence under Penal Law § 70.30(3), if that time has already been credited to the first sentence.
Holding
No, because under Penal Law § 70.30(3), time already credited against a previously imposed sentence cannot be credited again against a later sentence, even if the sentences run concurrently.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals focused on the language of Penal Law § 70.30(3), which allows credit for time spent in custody before a sentence commences as a result of the charge that culminated in the sentence. However, the statute explicitly states that credit shall not include any time that is credited against a previously imposed sentence. The court relied on Matter of Canada v. McGinnis, (36 AD2d 830, affd 29 NY2d 853), where it was held that time served under a prior conviction cannot be credited against a subsequent sentence. The court distinguished People ex rel. Middleton v. Zelker, (36 NY2d 691), noting that Middleton applied to time in custody before any sentence was imposed. The Court reasoned that once Kalamis began serving his first two sentences, all subsequent time in custody was credited against those sentences and could not be re-credited against the Suffolk County sentence. Even if Kalamis was in the constructive custody of Suffolk County, the time could not be credited because it had already been applied to the prior sentences. The court stated, “Here however Kalamis claims credit for time in custody after he had begun the first two sentences. Since that time was already being credited against the first two sentences, it could not also be credited as jail time against the third.” The court emphasized that any changes to this statutory scheme should be addressed by the Legislature.