Summary
The Rhode Island Supreme Court affirmed the denial of John Bergevine’s motion to dismiss an alleged probation violation. The court held that credit for time served did not retroactively commence or shorten the probationary period imposed at sentencing, and therefore Bergevine remained on probation when the later alleged offense occurred.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether credit for time served retroactively changed the date on which Bergevine's probation began or reduced the duration of the probationary term.
- Whether Bergevine was still subject to a Rule 32(f) probation-violation proceeding based on the alleged January 7, 2004 incident.
Holdings
- Credit for time served did not make Bergevine's probation sentence retroactive and did not reduce the ten-year probationary term imposed when sentence was originally imposed. The credit reduced only the time remaining on the five-year term of incarceration later ordered executed.
- Bergevine remained on probation when the alleged January 7, 2004 incident occurred, so the Rule 32(f) probation-violation proceeding was legally viable.
Key quotations
“It is clear that the credit the defendant was awarded for time served did not make the probation sentence that he received retroactive. Instead, it merely reduced the amount of time that the defendant had remaining to serve on the five-year term of incarceration imposed on October 20, 1994.” (883 A.2d at 1159)
“A defendant is placed on probation * * * when a sentence is imposed.” (883 A.2d at 1159)
Factual background
On April 25, 1994, Bergevine pleaded nolo contendere to kidnapping a minor and was sentenced to ten years suspended with ten years of probation. After he was arrested on new charges, the Superior Court found him to be a probation violator and ordered five years of the suspended sentence to be served. While incarcerated, he obtained credit for time spent in community confinement from April 19, 1993, through January 25, 1994, and later argued that this credit made his probation period begin retroactively and expire before an alleged January 7, 2004 offense.
Procedural history
Bergevine pleaded nolo contendere to kidnapping a minor and received a ten-year suspended sentence with ten years of probation. After a subsequent probation-violation finding, five years of the suspended sentence were ordered executed, and he later received credit for time spent in community confinement while awaiting trial. Following new charges based on an alleged January 7, 2004 incident, the State sought a Rule 32(f) probation-violation declaration; the Superior Court rejected Bergevine's motion to dismiss, and the Supreme Court denied and dismissed his appeal.