State v. C. Parks
State v. C. Parks, 2019 MT 252
Reversed on October 22, 2019, in a 5 to 0 published opinion — 9 pages and 1,726 words .
Case
DA 17-0497
Opinion
majority
Majority
James Jeremiah Shea
9 pages · 1,726 words
Joined by
Mike McGrath
Beth Baker
Laurie McKinnon
Dirk M. Sandefur
Smog Index: 10.3
Gunning Fog Score: 8.7
Coleman Liau Index: 8.8
Spache Readability Score: 5
Average Syllables Per Word: 1.4
Average Words Per Sentence: 10.7
Flesch Kincaid Grade Level: 5.1
Automated Readability Index: 3.6
Flesch Kincaid Reading Ease: 77.6
Dale Chall Readability Score: 5.4
Cited by
2022 MT 112N State v. J. Crowell DA 19-0350 2021 MT 197 State v. M. Mendoza DA 19-0587 2022 MT 81 State v. M. Tippets DA 20-0429 2022 MT 35N State v. R. Knapp DA 20-0472 2022 MT 228 State v. D. Spagnolo DA 20-0494 2022 MT 204 State v. R. Kortan DA 20-0577 2022 MT 147N State v. S. Strong (Grady) DA 21-0298 2022 MT 178 State v. L. Gudmundsen DA 21-0340 2024 MT 173 State v. C. Kepler DA 22-0471 2025 MT 172N State v. M. Sullivan DA 23-0196 2025 MT 290N State v. Kinholt DA 24-0292Full text
OCR’d from the filed PDF
Majority
James Jeremiah Shea
10/22/2019
DA 17-0497
Case Number: DA 17-0497
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
2019 MT 252
STATE OF MONTANA,
Plaintiff and Appellee,
v.
CORY SCOTT PARKS,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL FROM:
District Court of the Third Judicial District,
In and For the County of Anaconda-Deer Lodge, Cause No. DC-16-79
Honorable Ray J. Dayton, Presiding Judge
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For Appellant:
Chad Wright, Appellate Defender, Deborah S. Smith, Assistant Appellate
Defender, Helena, Montana
For Appellee:
Timothy C. Fox, Montana Attorney General, Brad Fjeldheim, Assistant
Attorney General, Helena, Montana
Ben H. Krakowka, Deer Lodge County Attorney, Anaconda, Montana
Submitted on Briefs: July 17, 2019
Decided: October 22, 2019
Filed:
cir-641.—if
__________________________________________
Justice James Jeremiah Shea delivered the Opinion of the Court.
¶1
Defendant Cory Scott Parks appeals the June 21, 2017 Sentence of the Third Judicial
District Court, Anaconda-Deer Lodge County, crediting him with sixty-one days of time
served.
¶2
We review the following issue on appeal:
Whether Parks was improperly denied credit for time served.
PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND1
¶3
On September 16, 2016, Parks was arrested in Deer Lodge County and later charged
with Criminal Possession of Dangerous Drugs, a felony, in violation of § 45-9-102, MCA,
and several misdemeanor charges. On November 16, 2016, Parks pled guilty to possession
of dangerous drugs in Deer Lodge County, and the State dropped the misdemeanor charges
pursuant to a plea agreement. After accepting his plea, the District Court released Parks on
his own recognizance, subject to conditions. Parks served a total of sixty-one days
(September 16, 2016 – November 16, 2016) in Deer Lodge County custody prior to his
release.
¶4
On February 27, 2017, the Deer Lodge County Attorney filed a Verified Petition to
Revoke Order of Release after Parks failed to appear for his presentence investigation
interview. On February 28, 2017, the District Court revoked Parks’ release, issued a bench
warrant for his arrest, and set bail at $50,000. On March 4, 2017, Parks was arrested for
1
Certain relevant portions of the procedural and factual background have been taken from the
Second Judicial District Court, Butte-Silver Bow County, and Silver Bow County Justice Court
records, of which we have taken judicial notice pursuant to M. R. Evid. 202(b)(6).
2
possession of dangerous drugs in Cascade County. That same day, Parks was served with
the Deer Lodge County warrant. On March 8, 2017, Parks was charged with forgery in
Silver Bow County Justice Court. On that same day, the Silver Bow County Justice Court
filed an arrest warrant, set bail at $5,500, and served the warrant on Parks while he was
detained in Cascade County. On May 30, 2017, the Cascade County District Court
sentenced Parks on the possession of dangerous drugs charge and ordered his release.
Parks was then transferred to the Silver Bow County Detention Center.
¶5
Parks’ Deer Lodge County sentencing hearing began on May 24, 2017 and was
continued to June 21, 2017. At the hearing, Parks requested an additional 105 days credit
for time served from March 4, 2017—when he was arrested in Cascade County and the
Deer Lodge County bench warrant was served on him—through the day of his sentencing
on June 21, 2017. 2 When pressed by the District Court, neither party could produce
documents from the Cascade County case establishing how much time, if any, Parks was
credited when he entered his plea on the Cascade County charge. Also, Parks’ counsel
mistakenly informed the District Court that Parks had entered a plea on the Silver Bow
County forgery charge when, in fact, that charge was still pending.
¶6
The District Court imposed a five-year commitment to the Department of
Corrections (DOC) with two years suspended on the possession of dangerous drugs charge.
The District Court gave Parks credit for the sixty-one days he was detained in the Deer
2
The 105-days credit that Parks requested was in addition to credit for the sixty-one days Parks
had already served in Deer Lodge County from September 16, 2016 – November 16, 2016. That
time is not in dispute.
3
Lodge County jail and denied his request for additional credit for time served while he was
incarcerated in Cascade County and Silver Bow County. The District Court reasoned that
the Cascade County custody was directly related to his possession of dangerous drugs
charge in Cascade County and the Silver Bow County custody was directly related to the
forgery charge. On appeal, Parks does not dispute that he is not entitled to credit for time
served while in Cascade County custody. The sole issue before us is whether Parks should
have been credited with twenty-two days served in Silver Bow County custody.
STANDARDS OF REVIEW
¶7
We review a criminal sentence of at least one year of actual incarceration for legality
only. City of Bozeman v. Cantu, 2013 MT 40, ¶ 11, 369 Mont. 81, 296 P.3d 461; State v.
Claassen, 2012 MT 313, ¶ 14, 367 Mont. 478, 291 P.3d 1176. The sentence is legal if it
falls within the parameters set by applicable sentencing statutes and if the sentencing court
adheres to the affirmative mandates of the applicable sentencing statutes. State v. Ariegwe,
2007 MT 204, ¶ 174, 338 Mont. 442, 167 P.3d 815. A determination of legality is a
question of law that we review de novo. State v. Seals, 2007 MT 71, ¶ 7, 336 Mont. 416,
156 P.3d 15.
DISCUSSION
¶8
Whether the District Court erred by failing to credit Parks for time served.
¶9
Montana law regarding credit for time served states in relevant part:
(1) A person incarcerated on a bailable offense against whom a judgment of
imprisonment is rendered must be allowed credit for each day of
incarceration prior to or after conviction, except that the time allowed as a
credit may not exceed the term of the prison sentence rendered.
4
Section 46-18-403, MCA. Calculating credit for time served “is not a discretionary act,
but a legal mandate.” State v. Hornstein, 2010 MT 75, ¶ 12, 356 Mont. 14, 229 P.3d 1206
(citing State v. Hoots, 2005 MT 346, ¶ 31, 330 Mont. 144, 127 P.3d 369). A district court
may not decide to withhold credit in anticipation that credit may be given in a subsequent
sentencing. See Hornstein, ¶ 16 (holding that the district court erred in denying the
defendant credit for time served when the court reasoned the time may be credited to the
defendant’s parole by the Pardons and Parole Board). Once a judgment of imprisonment
has been entered for a bailable offense, a person is entitled to credit for each day of
incarceration prior to and after the conviction. See State v. McDowell, 2011 MT 75, ¶ 27,
360 Mont. 83, 253 P.3d 812; Hornstein, ¶¶ 12-13; § 46-18-403(1), MCA. Each day of
incarceration must be credited to a defendant’s sentence “only if that incarceration was
directly related to the offense for which the sentence [was] imposed.” State v. Kime,
2002 MT 38, ¶ 16, 308 Mont. 341, 43 P.3d 290, overruled in part on other grounds by
State v. Herman, 2008 MT 187, ¶ 12, 343 Mont. 494, 188 P.3d 978.
¶10
The purpose of § 46-18-403, MCA, is:
[T]o eliminate the disparity of treatment between indigent and nonindigent
defendants . . . credit for time served is given so as not to penalize indigent
defendants who are unable to post bail and must remain in custody until they
are sentenced when nonindigents may secure their release and remain free
during that time period.
Kime, ¶ 15. Criminal defendants who are in custody and cannot afford bail are treated
equally to criminal defendants who can afford bail and are released by granting presentence
credit. See Hornstein, ¶ 13 (citing Kime, ¶ 15); State v. Price, 2002 MT 150, ¶ 27,
310 Mont. 320, 50 P.3d 530. A person who posts bail and is released is not incarcerated
5
and will not receive credit for time served. State v. Gulbranson, 2003 MT 139, ¶¶ 12-13,
316 Mont. 163, 69 P.3d 1187, overruled in part on other grounds by Herman, ¶ 12. The
purpose of § 46-18-403, MCA, is not served when a person is given credit for time served
for offenses unrelated to the incarceration. Kime, ¶ 16 (finding that the defendant was only
entitled to credit for the time spent in jail between his arrest and transfer to the Montana
State Prison reasoning his subsequent incarceration at the Montana State Prison related to
a prior felony conviction).
¶11
Presentence time should only be credited “once against the aggregate of all terms
imposed when multiple sentences are imposed consecutively.” Price, ¶ 28 (holding that a
defendant’s time served would be applied once to the aggregate of the terms of his sentence
rather than to each individual term of his sentence). Granting double credit does not serve
the intended purpose of § 46-18-403, MCA. Price, ¶ 27. However, a defendant may be
entitled to receive credit for a single period of presentence incarceration on separate
bailable offenses under § 46-18-403, MCA. See State v. Pavey, 2010 MT 104, ¶ 25,
356 Mont. 248, 231 P.3d 1104; State v. Erickson, 2005 MT 276, ¶¶ 22-24, 329 Mont. 192,
124 P.3d 119 (concluding that if the defendant’s bond had been formally revoked, then he
would have been incarcerated on two unrelated charges simultaneously and entitled to
receive credit for time served on each charge).
¶12
In this case, the District Court denied Parks credit for the time served in Silver Bow
County because it determined that the twenty-two days Parks was held in Silver Bow
County was directly related to the Silver Bow County forgery charge. While this is true,
Parks was also being held on the Deer Lodge County warrant. Both the Silver Bow County
6
charge and the Deer Lodge County charge were bailable offenses, with bail set at $5,500
on the Silver Bow County charge and $50,000 on the Deer Lodge County charge.
¶13
The sentencing court must determine for what charge the defendant was being
detained and if the charge is bailable. See Hornstein, ¶ 17; Kime, ¶¶ 13, 16. In the present
case, the District Court attempted to ascertain the circumstances of Parks’ Silver Bow
County custody in order to properly credit him with the time served that he was due.
However, neither party presented clear evidence to the District Court on what charges
Parks was being held on while in Silver Bow County. Having determined from the Silver
Bow County records that Parks was held on both the Deer Lodge County and Silver Bow
County charges, and that both were bailable offenses, we conclude that Parks was entitled
to credit for the twenty-two days he served in Silver Bow County. Even if Parks posted
the $5,500 bail in the Silver Bow Justice Court case, he still would have been detained
pursuant to the bench warrant from the Deer Lodge County District Court unless he could
have posted the $50,000 bail. See Hornstein, ¶ 17; Kime, ¶ 16. Thus, Parks is entitled to
twenty-two days credit for time served. See Pavey, ¶ 25; Erickson, ¶¶ 22-24.
CONCLUSION
¶14
Parks was entitled to receive credit for the twenty-two days he spent in custody in
Silver Bow County. We remand for entry of an amended judgment consistent with this
Opinion.
/S/ JAMES JEREMIAH SHEA
7
We Concur:
/S/ MIKE McGRATH
/S/ BETH BAKER
/S/ LAURIE McKINNON
/S/ DIRK M. SANDEFUR
8