N.Y. Laws » CHAPTER Correction / ARTICLE Provisions Applicable to Sentences Imposed Under the the Revised Penal Plan
New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Correction Law § 804 (2026)

Good behavior allowances against definite sentences

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
§ 804. Good behavior allowances against definite sentences. 1. Every
person confined in an institution serving a definite sentence of
imprisonment may receive time allowances as discretionary reductions of
the term of his sentence not to exceed in the aggregate one-third of the
term imposed by the court. Such allowances may be granted for good
behavior and efficient and willing performance of duties assigned or
progress and achievement in an assigned treatment program, and may be
withheld, forfeited or cancelled in whole or in part for bad behavior,
violation of institutional rules or failure to perform properly in the
duties or program assigned.
  2. If a person is serving more than one sentence, the authorized
allowances may be granted separately against the term of each sentence
or, where consecutive sentences are involved, against the aggregate
term. Allowances based upon sentences of less than one month may be
granted, and in such case the maximum allowance shall be one day for
every three days of the sentence. In no case, however, shall the total
of all allowances granted to any such person exceed one-third of the
time he would be required to serve, computed without regard to this
section.
  3. No person shall have the right to demand or require the allowances
authorized by this section. The decision of the sheriff, superintendent,
warden or other person in charge of the institution, or where such
institution is under the jurisdiction of a county or city department the
decision of the head of such department, as to the granting,
withholding, forfeiture, cancellation or restoration of such allowances
shall be final and shall not be reviewable if made in accordance with
law.
  4. A person who has earned a reduction of sentence pursuant to this
section and who has been conditionally released under subdivision two of
section 70.40 of the penal law shall not forfeit such reduction by
reason of conduct causing his return to the institution. Provided,
nevertheless, that such reduction may be forfeited by reason of
subsequent conduct while serving the remainder of his term.
  5. The state commission of correction shall promulgate record keeping
rules and regulations for the granting, withholding, forfeiture,
cancellation and restoration of allowances authorized by this section.
  6. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this section, in any
case where a person is serving a definite sentence in an institution
under the jurisdiction of the state department of corrections and
community supervision, subdivisions three and four of section eight
hundred three of this chapter shall apply.
  7. Upon commencement of any definite sentence the provisions of this
section shall be furnished to the person serving the sentence and the
meaning of same shall be fully explained to him by an officer designated
in the regulation to perform such duty.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1985–2013 · leading case: People ex rel. Ryan v. Cheverko, 2 N.E.3d 233 (N.Y. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People ex rel. Ryan v. Cheverko, 2 N.E.3d 233 (N.Y. 2013). · cites it 4× “at [4] [b]; Correction Law § 804 [1]). Considering these directives together with section 70.”
Trice v. Ciuros, 127 Misc. 2d 289 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1985). · cites it 6× “Petitioner has requested from respondent to be considered for good time allowance pursuant to Correction Law § 804. Respondent has denied petitioner’s request on the ground that she is not entitled to consideration of good time allowance under an adjudication of criminal…”
People v. Herrington, 136 A.D.2d 871 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988). “After nearly eight months in jail, defendant petitioned Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus, claiming that his detention was illegal because the waiver of good-time credit violated Correction Law § 804. Supreme Court granted the writ and, since the hearing date would have…”
People v. Varrecchia, 141 Misc. 2d 1 (1988). “) The defendant, on his June 9, 1976 conviction, received a sentence of one-year incarceration at the Nassau County Correctional Center, which, with discretionary reduction of sentence (Correction Law § 804 [1]), ended on November 9, 1976.”
Maccio v. Goord, 194 Misc. 2d 805 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2003). “To hold otherwise would essentially deprive any absconder from temporary release of any credit at all for up to 120 days good time as against a one-year definite sentence of imprisonment (Correction Law § 804; Penal Law § 70.30 [4] [b]) — depending only upon when such absconder…”
People ex rel. Ryan v. Cheverko, 102 A.D.3d 990 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). “30 [4] [b]; Correction Law § 804 [2]), and his credit for time served, the petitioner’s release date has passed.”
People ex rel. Ryan v. Cheverko, 102 A.D.3d 990 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). “30 [4] [b]; Correction Law § 804 [2]), and his credit for time served, the petitioner’s release date has passed.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.