Summary
The Supreme Court of Montana held that Charles Lee Hornstein was entitled to 224 days of credit against his new sentences for time spent incarcerated before sentencing on the new charges. The court concluded that the statutory requirement to credit time directly related to a newly imposed sentence was not preempted by the Parole Board's discretionary decision to count the same period toward his prior sentence. The court reversed and remanded for entry of an amended judgment.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the District Court erred by denying Hornstein credit against his new sentence for the 224 days he spent incarcerated in county jail before sentencing.
Holdings
- Hornstein was entitled to a 224-day credit against his new sentence because his county-jail incarceration was directly related to the new charges and § 46-18-403(1), MCA, required credit for each day of qualifying incarceration.
- The possibility that Hornstein would receive credit against both sentences did not permit the District Court to deny the statutory credit against the new sentence.
Key quotations
“Pre-conviction jail time credit toward a sentence granted by statute is a "matter of right."” (¶ 12, 2010 MT 75)
“Its discretionary actions with regard to parole time do not preempt the statutory requirement that credit be granted for time served which is "directly related" to a newly imposed sentence—whether to be served consecutively or concurrently with the previous sentence.” (¶ 16, 2010 MT 75)
“Hornstein would not have been incarcerated in County Jail for this period but for the new charges, making that time "directly related" to those charges.” (¶ 17, 2010 MT 75)
Factual background
Hornstein was arrested after fleeing mall security and was found possessing baseball caps bearing store pricing tags; a search of his vehicle also produced additional allegedly stolen items and syringes containing methamphetamine. He was charged with felony drug possession, misdemeanor drug-paraphernalia possession, and two misdemeanor theft counts. Unable to post $50,000 bail, he remained in county jail for 224 days pending resolution of the new charges, while also being on parole for a prior aggravated-assault conviction. After he pleaded guilty, the District Court denied credit for the county-jail time because the Parole Board had treated the same period as credit toward his prior sentence.
Procedural history
Hornstein was arrested on new drug and theft charges, remained in county jail because he could not post bail, and later pleaded guilty under a plea agreement. The District Court imposed concurrent new sentences consecutive to his prior aggravated-assault sentence but denied credit for the 224 days served before sentencing because the Parole Board had credited that period toward the prior sentence. The District Court denied Hornstein's subsequent motion for credit, and he appealed.
Remand instructions
Remand for entry of an amended judgment granting Hornstein a 224-day credit against his new sentence consistent with the Opinion.