Kentucky

Interstate compact for crediting inmates accounts for participation in employment programs: COMMONWEALTH v. CRUM (COA 3/28/2008)

By Michael Stevens

COMMONWEALTH V. CRUM
CRIMINAL:  Interstate compact for crediting inmates accounts for participation in employment programs
2006-CA-001419
PUBLISHED: REVERSING
PANEL: ACREE PRESIDING; LAMBERT, ROSENBLUM CONCUR
FRANKLIN COUNTY
DATE RENDERED: 3/28/2008

CA reversed the judgment of the Franklin Circuit Court ordering the Commonwealth to compensate Thomas Crum for work performed as an inmate while he was incarcerated in a Florida penitentiary under the Interstate Corrections Compact. KRS 196.610. According to the terms of the contract, Florida was responsible for any compensation owed to Crum. Further, Crum was not entitled to be paid according to the Kentucky Department of Corrections? regulations governing inmate employment since Section 14(a) of the contract specifies that he would be compensated on the same basis as offenders from the receiving State, in this case, Florida. Article III(a)(3) specifically requires contracts pursuant to the interstate compact to establish the terms for ?the disposition or crediting of any payments received by inmates on account? of their participation in inmate employment programs. Thus, its language is specific to the issue of inmate employment. Article IV(h) does not specifically govern inmate employment. Consequently, Article III(a)(3) takes precedence on that issue.

Digested by Scott C. Byrd
www.olginandbyrd.com

Full post as published by Kentucky Cases on June 08, 2008 (boomark / email).