Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
We agree with the Supreme Court that the respondents correctly excluded from their computation of the petitioner's jail-time credit the period of time she resided at Project Green Hope, a private residential rehabilitation center for women, as a condition of being released on her own recognizance while awaiting disposition of her case (see, Correction Law § 600-a; Penal Law § 70.30). Although she was subject to a number of rules and regulations while in residence there, the petitioner was not "in custody" for purposes of jail-time credit under Penal Law § 70.30 (3) (see, Matter of Hawkins v. Coughlin, 132 A.D.2d 381, affd 72 N.Y.2d 158; People v. Graham, 89 A.D.2d 671). Kunzeman, J.P., Kooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
Harwood, J., concurs on constraint of Matter of Hawkins v Coughlin ( 132 A.D.2d 381, affd 72 N.Y.2d 158).