Summary
The Nebraska Supreme Court considered whether Kevin M. Wines was entitled to additional credit for time served against multiple concurrent sentences after his sentences were vacated in part and he was resentenced. The court held that the district court did not err by applying 451 days of credit to a sentence in the 2016 case but not also to sentences in the 2018 case. The court affirmed the district court’s sentences.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Nebraska law required the district court to apply 451 days of credit for time served to multiple concurrent sentences when the defendant was in custody between an initial sentencing and resentencing.
- Whether Neb. Rev. Stat. § 83-1,106(2) required credit for time served because Wines was resentenced after some sentences were vacated.
- Whether Neb. Rev. Stat. § 83-1,106(3) and (5)(b) authorized the district court to award credit against sentences that remained in effect when other sentences were set aside by the Court of Appeals.
Holdings
- Credit for the same period of custody need not be applied to multiple concurrent sentences merely because the custody occurred between an initial sentencing and resentencing.
- Section 83-1,106(2) did not apply because Wines was resentenced but was not reprosecuted for the same offense or another offense based on the same conduct.
- The district court lacked authority to award credit under § 83-1,106(3) because subsection (5)(b) permits such credit only through the court in which the sentence was set aside and only in the final order setting aside that sentence.
Key quotations
“when concurrent sentences are imposed, the credit is applied once, and the credit applied once, in effect, is applied against each concurrent sentence.” (475)
“As the district court lacked power to award any credit for time served under § 83-1,106(3), we find it did not err by not doing so.” (477)
Factual background
Wines had convictions in a 2016 case and a 2018 case, with sentences ordered to run concurrently in part and consecutively in part. After the Court of Appeals vacated some sentences and remanded for resentencing, the district court determined that Wines had spent 451 days in custody between the original sentencing and resentencing. The district court credited those 451 days against his four-year sentence for delivery of a controlled substance in the 2016 case, but did not apply the same credit to the concurrent sentences in the 2018 case.
Procedural history
Wines was originally sentenced in two criminal cases in 2019 and received credit for time served. The Nebraska Court of Appeals vacated certain sentences and remanded for determinate resentencing while affirming other sentences. On remand, the district court awarded 451 days of credit to a sentence in the 2016 case and 14 days to one sentence in the 2018 case, but did not apply the 451 days to additional concurrent sentences. Wines appealed that ruling to the Nebraska Supreme Court.