Summary
The Montana Supreme Court reviews a district court's judgment on the second revocation of a suspended sentence. The court evaluates whether the defendant was entitled to credit for time served and elapsed street time, alongside a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. While reversing and remanding for the proper calculation of time served credit, the court affirms the denial of elapsed street time credit and finds no prejudice in defense counsel's performance.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the District Court erred by not granting credit for time served against Shewalter’s revocation sentence.
- Whether the District Court erred by denying any credit for elapsed street time against Shewalter’s sentence.
- Whether Shewalter received ineffective assistance of counsel at the dispositional hearing.
Holdings
- The District Court erred; the judgment is reversed on that issue and the case is remanded for entry of an amended judgment crediting the time served, including the disputed 13 days.
- The District Court correctly denied elapsed street‑time credit; the judgment is affirmed on that issue.
- Shewalter’s ineffective‑assistance claim fails; the judgment is affirmed on that issue.
Key quotations
“Section 46‑18‑203(7)(b), MCA, provides that if a suspended or deferred sentence is revoked, the judge shall “consider any elapsed time, consult the records and recollection of the probation and parole officer, and allow all of the elapsed time served without any record or recollection of violations as a credit against the sentence.”” (¶18)
““When considering ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC) claims, Montana courts apply the United States Supreme Court’s two‑prong test as articulated in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).”” (¶24)
Factual background
Shewalter pleaded guilty to criminal possession in 2006 and received a 10‑year sentence with part suspended. He later violated probation, leading to a revocation sentence in 2018 that included 49 days of credit for time served but no credit for elapsed street time. In 2022 the State sought a second revocation; the district court imposed a five‑year commitment with no street‑time credit and gave no credit for time served.
Procedural history
Shewalter was sentenced to a suspended term in 2006, later had the suspended portion revoked in 2018 and again in 2022. He appealed the district court’s denial of credit for time served, denial of elapsed street‑time credit, and alleged ineffective assistance of counsel.
Remand instructions
Remand to the District Court of the Twentieth Judicial District to determine Shewalter’s entitlement to credit for the disputed 13 days of time served and to enter an amended judgment reflecting the proper credit.