Jerry Herrington got the run-around when it came to determination of his release date from a New York prison. At his sentencing hearing, Herrington heard the judge sentence him to two years in prison. However the court's order and other records stated that he had a three year sentence.
Herrington notified prison officials and anyone else he could that there was an error. He was told over and over that he had to obtain the transcript of the proceeding to prove that the court's records were wrong. He went to prison officials to get his transcript, where he was told that the transcript was not in his prison files and he would have to get it from the court. He wrote to the court and was told that the court didn't have the transcript, but that it must be in his prison files.
Just before Herrington completed his third year in prison, and despite repeated dismissals of his claims by prison officials, the Lincoln Correctional Facility finally got the transcript. In the transcript the judge clearly sentenced him to two years.
When the transcript was brought to the attention of the court, by way of the New York Times request for information, the court's response was that the transcript was in error, and the judge actually sentenced Herrington to serve three years. The court relied on the court's clerk notation that the sentence was three years, and issued a new transcript that was exactly the same except it substituted the three year sentence for the two.
To make matters more confusing, the notes of the prosecutor and the defense attorney both stated that Herrington was sentenced to three years, not two. During the time that Herrington was sentenced, he was serving a three year sentence in New Jersey. The judge at sentencing had stated that the time he served in New Jersey would count toward the New York sentence.
The truth may never be known. It is possible that the judge intended to impose a three year sentence, but reasoned that since Herrington was serving time in New Jersey he wanted to give him credit for that time in fashioning a sentence. Instead of imposing the three years he imposed two to reflect the credit for the New Jersey time. The attorneys and clerk heard the judge say three years and made notes about it. It is unclear what the notes actually contained. On the other hand, maybe the court reporter heard it wrong and wrote two in the transcript instead of three years. Herrington would have to have heard it wrong too, and it would too much of a coincidence for him and the court reporter to make the same mistake. Maybe the judge wasn't speaking clearly.
One thing that is certain is that if Herrington were sentenced to two years he was held longer than he should have. Another certainty is that the prison officials did not even look into the matter like they should have until Herrington had served almost all of the third year. Herrington's claims should have been taken more seriously in the first place.