Why a repeat felon, now accused of dismembering a woman, was *really* released early.
PLACER COUNTY - After six months and repeated requests for information from both the Placer County District Attorney and CBS13, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) is finally revealing why a repeat felon, who is now accused of dismembering an elderly woman, was *really* released early from prison.
CDCR tells CBS13, it made an error last year and provided inaccurate information. Erby was actually paroled under the Prop 57 parole review process, but CDCR failed to tell the Placer County DA, which they are required to do by law.
Gire sent this letter to CDCR six months ago asking why Darnel Erby, now accused of murdering and dismembering a 77-year-old Sacramento woman, had been released early from prison despite repeated parole denials and alleged criminal activity while in prison. CDCR never responded to Gire.
"It's insulting," said Placer County District Attorney Morgan Gire. "I wrote that letter because I wanted answers to those questions and it went ignored until (CBS13) started asking the questions."
At the time, CDCR's public statement only made broad reference to "time served" and "parole." Gire assumed Erby had been released under Prop 57 Good Conduct Credits because CDCR is legally required to notify the DA of a parole.
Only now, after CBS13 asked additional follow-up questions, did CDCR finally correct the false information, notify the DA, and issue an apology to his office -- through us.
Two Ways Out
To understand the confusion, you have to understand that there are two primary ways out of prison early under voter-approved Prop. 57. However, CDCR's policies on these releases are constantly evolving because the agency has broad authority to create regulations and release inmates who are classified as nonviolent. (That includes those convicted of domestic violence, human trafficking, and other seemingly violent crimes.)
Parole Review: Inmates who are sentenced on multiple charges, or whose sentence is extended due to a second strike, are eligible for an early parole review at the end of the primary sentence. There are no hearings for Prop. 57 parole reviews. A commissioner reviews the case and decides. However, DAs and victims may submit letters contesting a release and CDCR must notify them if someone is paroled anyway.
Good Conduct Credit: Inmates can also receive enhanced or accelerated prison release credits, which were initially supposed to be "earned" under Prop 57 for completing rehabilitation programs. However, CDCR now gives out standardized credits which automatically cut most sentences in half the day an inmate arrives in custody.
CDCR does not consider these "early releases" and instead often says an inmate has "completed (their) term as defined by law." As a result, unlike with parole, CDCR does not have to reveal the credit calculations to victims or prosecutors. DAs and victims often don't learn about a release unless, or until, someone is accused of committing another crime.
Darnell Erby
In the case of Darnell Erby, CDCR wouldn't explain why he was out when he was arrested for allegedly killing and dismembering an elderly woman in her home last summer.
Erby was denied parole in 2017, 2018, and 2020, but then was quietly released about a year later after serving less than half his sentence. This, despite the fact the parole board cited criminal activity while in prison and found that he posed "a current, unreasonable risk of violence or... significant criminal activity."
According to CDCR, Erby had been sentenced to more than 24 years combined over the past 23 years for a variety of serious crimes including repeated burglary and drug convictions. He served a fraction of each sentence and reoffended shortly after several of his releases.
Gire wanted to know why Erby was out.
"We're supposed to know how and when and why inmates are released, and we're supposed to be given that opportunity in advance so that we can prepare victims and make whatever preparations we need to make for a dangerous inmate's release," said Gire.
CDCR Secrets
If the story sounds familiar, you may be thinking of Smiley Martin, one of the downtown mass shooting suspects. Martin was also denied parole due to his "unreasonable risk of violence or... significant criminal activity." Martin was also released months later after serving less than half his sentence and despite alleged criminal activity while in prison.
CDCR has refused to reveal the credit calculation that led to Martin's release, and even the former head of CDCR told CBS13 that he could not figure out how Martin earned enough credits to be released when he was.
"When I see someone who was sentenced to prison.... who was later released and commits a crime and they have served a fraction of the sentence they received, I get angry," said Gire. "I think our community gets angry. And the next question is, how did this happen? And I can't answer those questions."
Gire assumed Erby was released on credits because CDCR is legally required to notify him of parole.
So he sent this letter, asking CDCR for an explanation in August. So did we. Neither of us received a response.
"I am dependent on the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to give me that information that my community so richly deserves. And they didn't do it and they're not doing it. The legislature can make them do it," said Gire.
Well, now six months later, following news of two new bills that would force CDCR to reveal the secret credit calculations that lead to an inmate's release, the agency is finally responding to our questions -- clarifying Erby wasn't released on credits, but rather, he received early parole under Prop 57.
They simply failed to notify the Placer DA that Erby had been paroled, apologizing to him in an email to us.
"(D)ue to information officer error the reason for release was inaccurate... Erby received approval for parole under the NVPP on Feb. 8, 2021 and released to parole supervision on April 9, 2021."
"As to communication after the fact, it looks like notification to the Placer DA was not conducted. According to the Board of Parole Hearings, this was due to human error, and we apologize for that.
The Placer DA wrote a letter of opposition to Erby's parole. CDCR says they notified the Amador county DA of his release.
CDCR Flip Flop?
However, Gire is more concerned about the reason for the release than the fact that he wasn't notified.
"Well, it's disingenuous," said Gire.
Parole records reveal that Erby was denied parole in 2020 due to limited rehabilitation, a long history of reoffending shortly after release, and rule violations while in jail.
But one year, and one substance abuse course later, all those "aggravating" factors which were listed in the parole denial as reasons to keep him in prison -- suddenly became "mitigating" factors -- reasons cited for his release.
"What this demonstrates is they came up with the conclusion that he was to be released and they justified it with the same exact information that was used to keep him in a year before," said Gire.
Which may have had deadly consequences.