Hamilton v. Freeman
According to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, employees of the Department of Correction who are responsible for processing judgments received from the courts do not have the authority to change the sentences which have been imposed by those courts. In a decision handed down on November 20, 2001, the Court concluded that the sole authority to correct illegal sentences rests with the courts. Therefore, even when a judgment reflects an illegal sentence, Department of Correction employees must enter the sentence in Department records as the court has ordered. Under such circumstances, Department employees must notify the sentencing court and the parties that the sentence is illegal, but it is up to the court - not DOC employees - to correct the problem.
The case is Hamilton v. Freeman, which was first profiled in an article in these pages in the Spring of 2000. The case is a class action lawsuit filed by North Carolina Prisoner Legal Services on behalf of all inmates in the custody of the Department of Correction whose sentences had been changed by the Combined Records Department of the Department of Correction. As a result of those actions, NCPLS alleged that plaintiffs and members of the class were serving longer sentences than those imposed on them by the sentencing courts. Specifically, these inmates had received concurrent sentences for crimes for which consecutive sentences are required by statute, or had received CYO status from the sentencing court although they were statutorily ineligible for it. When Department of Correction employees received these judgments for concurrent sentences, they entered the sentences in their records as consecutive sentences. To compound the problem, DOC failed to keep records or notify anyone that the sentence had been changed. North Carolina Prisoner Legal Services alleged that is illegal under both State and Federal law and sought an injunction ordering a halt to the practice.
After four years in litigation, the case was decided favorably for the plaintiff inmates in the trial court. On July 3, 2000, Judge Howard Manning of the Wake County Superior Court ruled that the Department's practice of changing judgments violates State law and required that judgments be honored, even if they may be illegal. Judge Manning specifically ordered the Department to enter judgments for concurrent sentences as concurrent sentences, and to notify the sentencing court that the sentence may be illegal and in need of correction. The Department of Correction appealed the decision of the trial court to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, and obtained a stay of the trial court's Order, pending the outcome of the appeal.
In its recent decision, the Court of Appeals upheld the order of Judge Manning, agreeing with the trial court that the Department's practice violates State law. The Court further noted that the trial court's order (requiring the Department to enter judgments for concurrent sentences as concurrent sentences, and to notify the sentencing court that the sentence may need to be corrected) applies to all inmates currently in the custody of the Department, as well as to inmates who will come into the custody of the Department in the future.
