Appeals court clarifies state sentencing laws

BOISE – The Idaho Court of Appeals has clarified the state’s sentencing laws in two recent cases.

The appellate court found that courts should credit probation violators for time served while they await trial on the violation, and that the Idaho Department of Correction must calculate sentence completion dates in accordance with a judge’s ruling, even if the judge miscalculated the sentence.

In the first of two decisions issued last week, the court agreed with Timothy Covert that he should have been credited with time served.

Covert pleaded guilty to possession of methamphetamine in 2003, and was given a suspended sentence and placed on four years’ probation.

According to court documents, Covert’s probation officer in January 2005 found marijuana and drug paraphernalia in Covert’s car and bedroom. The officer had Covert arrested on an agent’s warrant for possession of a controlled substance and drug paraphernalia.

An agent’s warrant is issued by a probation officer and alleges the person arrested committed a crime or violated terms of probation. After Covert’s arrest, the probation officer asked a 6th District Court judge in Bannock County to issue a bench warrant to replace the agent’s warrant, and the judge agreed.

In court, Covert admitted violating his probation and the judge imposed Covert’s previously suspended sentence of three to seven years in prison.

Covert asked the judge for credit for the time he served before sentencing, but prosecutors argued that the credit should begin only after the bench warrant had been issued – 14 days after he was incarcerated.

The appellate court disagreed.

“Covert would have been eligible for release on bond in the possession case if not for the agent’s warrant, which authorized the jail to detain him,” Judge Darrell Perry wrote for the unanimous court. “Thus, the agent’s warrant was the functional equivalent of a bench warrant.”

In the second case, the appellate court ruled that the state Department of Correction miscalculated an offender’s release date when it failed to follow a judge’s instructions.

Willard Fullmer was sentenced in Clearwater County to seven years in prison for sexual abuse, with the 2nd District judge ruling he would be eligible for parole after one year. While serving that sentence, Fullmer escaped from prison only to be arrested three days later, according to court documents. For escape he was sentenced to five years in prison, becoming eligible for parole after two years.

State law requires that inmates begin serving escape sentences only after completing their original sentence. It also requires that a prisoner receive credit for time served awaiting judgment on an escape charge, as long as that time doesn’t overlap the original sentence.

Fullmer received more than three months of credit for time served on the escape sentence. Months later, he filed a petition and was granted a new sentencing on the escape charge, during which the judge allowed him about 27 months of credit.

The Department of Correction, however, continued to calculate Fullmer’s escape sentence with a full-term release date, saying the judge had erred.

But the state was incorrect, the unanimous appellate court found.

“Even if the sentencing court erred, however, IDOC is not justified in refusing to apply the credits as ordered by the court,” Judge Karen Lansing wrote for the court. “There is little doubt that IDOC’s action has not only contravened the literal words of the escape judgment as amended upon resentencing, but also frustrated the sentencing court’s intent to reduce Fullmer’s overall period of imprisonment.”

“We are aware of the ruling and will proceed accordingly,” Department of Correction spokeswoman Melinda O’Malley-Keckler said.