§ 61.1. Definitions.
The following words and terms, when used in this part, have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:
Backtime—The unserved part of a prison sentence which a convict would have been compelled to serve if the convict had not been paroled.
Detainer sentence—A sentence to which a convict is subject following release from a sentence which the convict is currently serving.
Detention hearing—A probable cause hearing held to determine whether a parolee should be detained or returned pending disposition of a new criminal charge.
Examiner—A Board member or a representative of the Board who conducts interviews or hearings on behalf of the Board.
Interested party—A parolee or a parolee’s counsel.
Official verification—Actual receipt by a parolee’s supervising parole agent of a direct written communication from a court in which a parolee was convicted of a new criminal charge attesting that the parolee was so convicted.
Panel—Two members of the Board, or a Board member and an examiner.
Parole supervision staff—Parole agents, their supervisors, deputy district directors and district directors.
Preliminary hearing—A hearing held to determine whether there is probable cause to believe that a parolee has committed a technical violation of parole.
Return or detain—Synonymous actions which indicate that a parolee should either be returned to, or continued in, custody pending disposition of outstanding criminal charges.
Revocation decision—A decision to recommit a parolee to prison after a revocation or violation hearing.
Revocation hearing—A hearing held to determine whether a parolee should be recommitted as a convicted violator.
Violation hearing—A hearing held to determine whether a parolee should be recommitted as a technical violator.
Authority The provisions of this § 61.1 amended under section 506 of The Administrative Code of 1929 (71 P. S. § 186); and the act of August 6, 1941 (P. L. 861, No. 323) (61 P. S. § § 331.1—331.34).
Source The provisions of this § 61.1 amended January 15, 1988, effective January 16, 1988, 18 Pa.B. 250. Immediately preceding text appears at serial page (104821).
Notes of Decisions Due Process
Revocation panel comprised of two panelists does not violate parolee’s due process right. Epps v. Board of Probation and Parole, 565 A.2d 214 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1989).
Petitioner who was charged as a technical violator and not as a convicted violator was not entitled to a revocation hearing and his due process rights were not violated. Obringer v. Board of Probation and Parole, 547 A.2d 449 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1988); appeal denied 557 A.2d 782 (Pa. Super. 1989).
Revocation Hearing
For the purpose of determining whether defendant’s revocation hearing was timely, criminal arrest and disposition report could not be considered when determining the date on which the Board of Probation and Parole received official verification of defendant’s guilty plea where the report was never entered into the record at the hearing. Johnson v. Board of Probation and Parole, 890 A.2d 45, 49 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006).
Board of Probation and Parole requirement to conduct parole revocation hearing within 120-days begins to run from the date the Board received official verification of parolee’s conviction, not on the date Board had knowledge of the conviction. Vanderpool v. Board of Probation and Parole, 874 A.2d 1280, 1283 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2005).
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.
This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Code full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
