Can a Parolee Seek Review of a Board Decision Denying Administrative Relief from a Board Order Recommitting Him as a Parole Violator and Recalculating His Sentence ? In Armbruster v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 919 A.2d 348 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007), the parolee sought review of a Board decision denying his request for administrative relief from a Board order recommitting him as a technical and convicted parole violator and recalculating his parole availability date and maximum expiration date. Having failed to post bail, the parolee was incarcerated on both new criminal charges and the Board's detainer. The parolee was convicted on the new criminal charges and was sentenced to a term of eight to twenty-four months. The trial court's sentencing order did not, however, indicate that the parolee was to receive credit for time served. He asserted that the Board erred in failing to credit his original sentence with the time he spent in presentence confinement. In rejecting the parolee's argument, the Armbruster court stated: The parolee's sole basis for requesting credit from the Board is that he was not given credit on his new sentence. Pursuant to Melhorn and McCray, where a sentencing court does not give an inmate full credit for time served, the inmate's remedy is in the trial court and through the direct appeal process, not through the Board. Under the facts presented here, we conclude that the Board properly refused to apply the parolee's pre-sentence confinement time towards his original sentence....Armbruster, 919 A.2d at 356.