Millard E. Price
SUBMITTED: April 20, 2017
RICHARD F. STOKES, JUDGE
the Court is Respondent Robert Coupe, Commissioner Department
of Correction's ("Respondent") Motion to
Dismiss. This Motion seeks to Dismiss Petitioner Millard E.
Price's ("Petitioner") application for a writ
of mandamus to be issued to the Department of Correction
("DOC") regarding his meritorious credit time.
Before the Court is also Petitioner's Motion for
Discovery and Inspection. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss
is DENIED and Petitioner's Motion for Discovery
and Inspection is GRANTED in part, I.
alleges that DOC has failed to grant all of the meritorious
credit time he is due. Therefore, Petitioner filed an
application for a writ of mandamus to order DOC to correct
this error and adjust his release date accordingly. He
alleges he worked at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center
("JTVCC") from June 2008 to March 2010 while he was
on pretrial detention; a period of 21 months. 11 Del.
C. § 4381(d) allows for an award of up to five days
of credit time per month for time worked. Therefore,
Petitioner claims he is entitled to 105 days of credit time.
Further, Petitioner states that he has requested information
from JTVCC regarding this issue, but has received an
inadequate response. He argues that JTVCC is the sole
custodian of the records that document his work during the
time period in question; thus, in Petitioner's view,
Respondent must provide him with the necessary records.
reviewing the Petitioner's application for a writ of
mandamus, this Court, hoping for an early and easy resolution
of the meritorious credit time issue, sent Respondent a
letter requiring DOC to submit an affidavit from the
appropriate person addressing whether Petitioner has received
meritorious credit time for work performed from June 2008 to
March 2010; if not, why not; and if so, what amount he has
received and why.
Martin ("Martin"), an Information Resource Manager
of Central Offender Records, filed an affidavit. Therein, she
4. .. .Upon further research in communicating with the
facility (JTVCC); [sic] it was discovered that there were an
additional 53 days earned that were not previously reported
between the timeframe [sic] of August 2008 to August 2009.
5. The total credits that have been reported and deducted
from his release date is 397 days; these credits were earned
between a timeframe [sic] of August 2008 through December
affidavit did not provide any support for the calculations.
now has filed a Motion to Dismiss Petitioner's
application for a writ of mandamus. Respondent's Motion
states the following:
4. .. .The DOC has awarded Price with meritorious goodtime
credits for the months of August 2008, September 2008, and
December 2008. No records indicate that Price earned any
credits during the months of June, July, October, and
November 2008. The DOC has awarded Price with meritorious
goodtime credits for all of the months in 2009. The DOC has
also awarded Price with meritorious goodtime credits from
January, February, August, September, October, November, and
December 2010. The DOC has done so despite the absence of
records indicating the Price earned any credits during the
months of March, April, May, June, and July
Motion also explains that DOC reached out to JTVCC's
Business Office to obtain any documentation of
Petitioner's work as an inmate. The Business Office
supplied his inmate statements, which showed when Petitioner
had worked. According to DOC, "Central Offender Records
then posted those credits earned, August 2008 through
February 2010 based on the information supplied to
JTVCC." Petitioner also was awarded
meritorious credits for work he performed in February 2016.
total, according to Respondent's Motion, Petitioner has
been awarded 402 days of meritorious credit time, which
Respondent believes is the maximum that is statutorily
permitted. In sum, Respondent argues that it has taken the
necessary action to ensure Petitioner has been awarded all
due meritorious credit time. Further, Respondent takes issue
with Petitioner's failure to submit any documentation to
support his contention. Therefore, Respondent moved for
response to the Motion to Dismiss, Petitioner submitted an
affidavit. The affidavit stated that Petitioner possessed
account statements provided by the JTVCC Business Office for
June 2008 to January 2011. These statements show 1099
payments for employment during the said timeframe, which
demonstrate a 21 month period of continued employment.
Further, the affidavit stated that in December 2016 Counselor
Kemp, a counselor at the prison, discussed with Petitioner
that DOC records were not showing meritorious credit time
that had been awarded from June 2008 to February 2010.
Rather, the earliest credits shown were given in March 2010.
Finally, Petitioner asserted in his affidavit that he was a
hostage in the recent hostage episode at JTVCC, and that, due
to his ...