Time creditable under this section shall reduce the minimum and maximum term of a sentence; and, irrespective of sentence, shall reduce the time required to attain privileges made available to inmates in the custody of the Division of Prisons of the Department of Adult Correction which are dependent, in whole or in part, upon the passage of a specific length of time in custody, including parole or post-release supervision consideration by the Post-Release Supervision and Parole Commission. However, nothing in this section shall be construed as requiring an automatic award of privileges by virtue of the passage of time. (1973, c. 44, s. 1; 1977, c. 711, s. 17; 1997-237, s. 4; 2011-145, s. 19.1(h); 2012-83, s. 22; 2017-186, s. 2(nn); 2021-180, s. 19C.9(p).)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases, 1978–2013 · leading case:
State v. Corkum, 735 S.E.2d 420 (N.C. Ct. App. 2012).
State v. Corkum, 735 S.E.2d 420 (N.C. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 4× “*135 The State cites both N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 15-196.3 and 15-196.4 in support of its position.”
State v. Farris, 444 S.E.2d 182 (N.C. 1994).
· cites it 6× “N.C.G.S. § 15-196.3 (1983). Because a defendant has spent time in custody as a result of a mere "charge," as opposed to a determination of guilt, the legislature has given him the benefit of the doubt by crediting that period of incarceration for the purpose of attaining prison…”
State v. Farris, 431 S.E.2d 803 (N.C. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 3× “upon the passage of a specific length of time in custody,” N.C.G.S. § 15-196.3 (1983), and a reduction in the sentence term did not accomplish that purpose.”
Carey v. Garrison, 452 F. Supp. 485 (W.D.N.C. 1978).
· cites it 3× “Insofar as petitioner’s eligibility for privileges such as “honor grade” status may depend in part upon the mere passage of time in custody, all “jail time” prior to his first conviction must also be credited.”
State v. Lewis, 752 S.E.2d 216 (N.C. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 2× “The General Assembly provided, in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15-196.3 (2011), that “[t]ime creditable under [ N.”
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.