In Re Paez

Petitioner David Paez seeks restoration of good time which was forfeited under a statutory provision not in effect at the time he was convicted, He argues that the application to him of the statute increasing the amount of time which may be forfeited for misconduct constitutes a violation of the prohibition against ex post facto laws. We agree.

Petitioner was committed to state prison for an offense committed before January 1, 1983. He was charged with a disciplinary rule violation on January 19, 1983, for involvement in a physical altercation. He was found guilty and assessed 150 days behavior credit loss pursuant to Penal Code section 2932, subdivision (a).

Amendment to section 2932

Prior to January 1, 1983, a state prisoner could reduce his term of confinement by one-third by earning credits for good behavior and program participation, referred to collectively as “conduct credits.” (See former § 2931; see People v. Sage (1980) 26 Cal.3d 498, 501 [ 165 Cal.Rptr. 280 , 611 P.2d 874 ].) Section 2932 provided for the forfeiture of credits either by failure to participate in work programs or by specified acts of misconduct. It stated that: “Not more than 90 days of good…