State v. Semrad

Summary

The Supreme Court of South Dakota held that parole eligibility advisements are estimates and are not part of a defendant's judicial sentence. Consequently, the Department of Corrections' determination that Scott R. Semrad was required to serve 60% of his six-year sentence, and the circuit court's corrected advisement, did not increase his sentence. The court also held that the statutory discrepancy-notice provision did not apply because Semrad was sentenced under the new system after 1996.

Holdings

1. A circuit court's parole-eligibility advisement is an estimate required after sentence is imposed and is not part of the judicial sentence.
2. Neither the Department of Corrections' administrative advisement nor the circuit court's corrected parole-eligibility estimate increased Semrad's six-year sentence.
3. SDCL 23A-27-48 did not apply to Semrad because he was sentenced after July 1, 1996 and was therefore a new-system offender whose parole eligibility was governed by SDCL chapter 24-15A, not chapter 24-15.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court's initial 35% parole-eligibility estimate was part of Semrad's sentence and therefore controlled over the Department of Corrections' 60% determination.
2. Whether the circuit court's corrected 60% parole-eligibility estimate or the Department of Corrections' determination unlawfully increased Semrad's sentence after he began serving it.
3. Whether SDCL 23A-27-48 required a parole-eligibility estimate by the court or a written discrepancy notice from the Department of Corrections for Semrad, a new-system offender sentenced after July 1, 1996.

Disposition

affirmed