The Ankeney v. State of Colorado - Prison Sentences, Mandatory Release Date (MRD) and Credit for Good Time in the Colorado Department of Corrections (CDOC)

Ankeney et. al. v, Raemish – Case summary and update as of 3/16/2015

On 3/16/2015, the Supreme Court of Colorado decided against our position and no one will benefit a single day off their time from the Ankeney decision.  We were extremely disappointed in the outcome and believe the Colorado Supreme Court is wrong.  There is no appeal to the US Supreme Court because the issue revolves around Colorado law and the Colorado Supreme Court has the final say on Colorado law.

 

End update 3/16/2015

_____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Ankeney et. al. v, Raemish – Case summary and update as of 12/09/2014

As stated below, an oral argument for the Ankeney v. Raemish (CDOC - State of Colorado Department of Corrections) lawsuit was presented to the Colorado Supreme Court on December 9, 2014.  The law firm of Killmer, Lane and Newman will not have any case matter update information until the Colorado Supreme Court reaches a decision and renders their verdict.  The anticipated CSC decision timeline is the spring of 2015 and at that time additional information will be posted to our website.

 

End update 12/18/2014
_____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Ankeney et. al. v, Raemish – Case summary and update as of 10/15/2014

An oral argument for the Ankeney v. Raemish (CDOC - State of Colorado Department of Corrections) lawsuit has been scheduled in front of the Colorado Supreme Court for December 9, 2014 at 2:30 p.m.  It is open to the public.  For additional information on the Colorado Supreme Court, visit their website at: http://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Supreme_Court/Index.cfm

 

End update 10/15/2014

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Ankeney et. al. v, Raemish – Case summary and update as of 09/23/2014

As stated in the 9/5/14 Ankeney v. Raemish (CDOC- State of Colorado Department of Corrections) news update, opposing counsel, the Colorado Attorney General’s Office, has filed their Reply Brief with the Supreme Court of Colorado.  All of the filed court documentation, including this one, is attached at the bottom of this page and we welcome and encourage you to read through this page and its attachments.

 

End update 9/23/2014

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Ankeney et. al. v, Raemish – Case summary and update as of 09/05/2014

The State appealed the Ankeney decision to the Colorado Supreme Court and filed their brief explaining why they think it was wrongly decided in Ankeney’s favor.  I’ve just filed our Answer Brief explaining why the Court of Appeals was correct.  They will file a Reply Brief within about a month and then the case will be set for oral argument in front of the Supreme Court.  That is a public proceeding in the Supreme Court and they will set a date when they are ready, which will probably be this winter.  We will argue the case and within several months of the argument, the Supreme Court will render a decision.  If we win, many people will immediately be released from DOC.  If we lose, everyone maintains status quo at DOC.  The federal case will likely take a back seat to the Colorado Supreme Court case.

 

End update 9/5/2014 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Ankeney et. al. v, Raemish – Case summary and update as of 6/18/2014

Randy Ankeney filed a pro se habeas in the state court and lost.  He alleged DOC was violating the law by their failure to correctly apply good time to people sentenced after 1983.  He then took a pro se appeal to the Court of Appeals and in an unpublished opinion authored by Judge Daily, he won.  In a 3-0 opinion they said DOC MUST apply good time to a prisoner’s mandatory release date.  Based on that, David Lane filed a section 1983 civil rights  suit in federal court.  DOC has moved to dismiss and we’ve responded.  They will reply.  In the meantime, the Colorado Court of Appeals remanded the Ankeney case back to the district court which applied the Court of Appeals ruling and released him from parole.  The Attorney General, representing DOC has taken a direct appeal from that to the Colorado Supreme Court and we are briefing it now for the Colorado Supreme Court.  There are two things going at the same time – our civil rights suit in federal court and briefing in the Colorado Supreme Court.  We have a fighting chance but we haven’t won anything yet other than in the Colorado Court of Appeals, which is a very good start.  The federal court could dismiss the civil rights suit  and the Supreme Court could reverse the Court of Appeals.  No one is being released or recalculated on their time unless and until we win, which may or may not happen.  If we survive all these hurdles, we will certify a class and if we win the entire case, potentially thousands of prisoners will be released.  But that’s our best case scenario.  If we win, everyone who was sentenced after 1983 doing a term of years will be included automatically.  Right now it is not a class action and you need do nothing to be included if we certify the class. You will automatically be included.  We do not need any paperwork from you.  Fingers crossed!

 

End update 6/18/2014

_____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Ankeney et. al. v, Raemish – Important Case update as of 6/3/2014

1.  The lawsuit alleges that DOC fails to credit good time and some earned time when figuring out an inmate's mandatory release date;

2.  This is not yet a class action.  There are currently just a few plaintiffs while we see if the federal court will let this suit proceed;

3.  If it is allowed to proceed, we will turn it into a class action but right now, it is not a class action;

4.  If it turns into a class action if the court allows it to proceed, and you fit the criteria for class inclusion, you need not do anything at this time as you will automatically be included in the law suit;

5.  The State has filed a motion to dismiss the case and we have filed a response.  Within a short time the State will file a reply and then the court will decide whether to dismiss or not;

6.  If the case is dismissed, my plan is to re-file in State court, depending upon the federal ruling.  Even if the case is dismissed I plan to continue to fight in State court;

7.  If you have a 35(c) on your own case, do not wait for the outcome in the Ankeney case to file it.  Your 35(c) may involve issues unrelated to your MRD and you have a statute of limitations you need to follow in your own case.

 

End update 6/3/2014

_____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Ankeney et. al. v, Raemish

Please read this information carefully and mail or e-mail the requested information (in bold) so we are able to add the individual's information to our data base contact list.  If you have any questions, please feel free to email us at goodtime@kln-law.com.

Put as simply as possible, the lawsuit’s main claim is that the Department of Corrections has failed to award fifteen days of “good time” per month toward inmates’ Mandatory Release Date (MRD) as required by statute.  Accordingly, the lawsuit may affect any current or former Colorado D.O.C. inmate with a Mandatory Release Date who is subject to a mandatory period of parole, so long as that inmate was not released by the parole board before his or her properly calculated mandatory release date.

Those who are likely NOT affected are inmates serving life sentences, sex offenders who are subject to SOLSA (the indeterminate sentencing act), sex offenders subject to discretionary parole pursuant to the Martin and Cooper cases, and any other offender who is NOT subject to mandatory parole.

 

Any offender who has a mandatory release date and a mandatory period of parole may be affected by this lawsuit.  The court has not yet certified the lawsuit as a class action.  However, assuming that it does, anyone affected should be notified that they are represented by the class action unless they choose to “opt out” and file their own lawsuit separately. 

 

If you are not sure whether you fall into one of the above categories, please write to us with the details of your case, the date of offense and date of sentencing, the sentence imposed, along with a copy of your mittimus.  However, we want to be clear that unless you have a MANDATORY RELEASE DATE and a MANDATORY PERIOD OF PAROLE, you are probably not affected by this lawsuit.

 

At this point we are happy to take the following information:

  • The name of the inmate

  • DOC number

  • Facility and mailing address

  • Charge(s)

  • Sentence

  • Whether or not they have a Mandatory Release Date

  • Whether or not they have a Mandatory Period of Parole

  • Copy of his/her mittimus and Time Computation Report (*A copy of your mittimus should be available from any prisoner’s case manager.*)

Additionally, if you are contacting our firm on behalf of an inmate, and are a continued contact point for the inmate, please send us the following information:

  • Your name

  • Address

  • Phone number

  • e-mail address

  • Relationship to the inmate

Due to the high volume of calls, e-mails, and letters we are receiving, we are asking that any specific questions be put in writing.  We will do our best to respond. Affected class members will be notified and contacted at the appropriate time.

 

As a reminder, the Killmer, Lane & Newman, LLP email address to submit your information is: goodtime@kln-law.com.  However, if you prefer to mail your information to us, you may do so at the following address: 

 

Killmer, Lane & Newman, LLP
Attn: Ankeney v. State of Colo Case
1543 Champa Street  - Suite 400
Denver, CO 80202

 

In the event that the court certifies the class and we determine that you qualify for the class, we will contact you; however, this may not occur for several months. 

 

Please be advised that by sending your information, you have not established an attorney-client relationship with us.  We are expressing no legal opinion on the matter at this time or on any other matters you may have shared with us.  We are not your lawyers and have not agreed to represent you in any capacity.

 

 

Please reload

Featured Posts

Aspen Valley Hospital Accused of Patient-Privacy Breach

June 15, 2016

1/4
Please reload

Recent Posts
Please reload

 

The Odd Fellows Hall • 1543 Champa Street, Suite 400 • Denver, CO 80202

303-571-1000 (phone) • 303-571-1001 (fax) • www.kln-law.com

  • Twitter Social Icon
  • Facebook Social Icon