State v. Gavin Lamar Mour ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
    Docket No. 44930
    STATE OF IDAHO,                                 )   2017 Unpublished Opinion No. 617
    )
    Plaintiff-Respondent,                   )   Filed: October 11, 2017
    )
    v.                                              )   Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk
    )
    GAVIN LAMAR MOUR,                               )   THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
    )   OPINION AND SHALL NOT
    Defendant-Appellant.                    )   BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
    )
    Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho,
    Kootenai County. Hon. John T. Mitchell, District Judge.
    Order denying Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion, affirmed.
    Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Andrea W. Reynolds,
    Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.
    Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Russell J. Spencer, Deputy
    Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.
    ________________________________________________
    Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;
    and HUSKEY, Judge
    ________________________________________________
    PER CURIAM
    Gavin Lamar Mour pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance, 
    Idaho Code § 37
    -
    2732(c)(1). The district court imposed a unified sentence of five years, with a minimum period
    of confinement of two years, suspended that sentence, and placed Mour on probation for a period
    of three years.    The district court eventually revoked probation and later relinquished
    jurisdiction.
    Mour subsequently filed an Idaho Criminal Rule 35(c) motion requesting additional
    credit for time served, asserting that the district court miscalculated his time served and arguing
    that he was entitled to credit for discretionary jail time served as a condition of probation
    1
    pursuant to 
    Idaho Code § 18-309
    . The district court determined that Mour was not entitled to
    credit for the time served as a condition of probation. Mour filed a motion for reconsideration,
    which the district court denied. Mour timely appealed, arguing that the district court erred by not
    granting him credit for the discretionary jail time he served as a condition of probation.
    The awarding of credit for time served is governed by I.C. § 18-309. The language of
    I.C. § 18-309 is mandatory and requires that, in sentencing a criminal defendant or when hearing
    an I.C.R. 35(c) motion for credit for time served, the court give the appropriate credit for
    prejudgment incarceration. State v. Moore, 
    156 Idaho 17
    , 20-21, 
    319 P.3d 501
    , 504-05 (Ct. App.
    2014). Mour predicates his argument on an amendment to I.C. § 18-309. Because Mour was
    sentenced on March 21, 2011, and the amendment did not become effective until July 1, 2015,
    his argument would only be valid if I.C. § 18-309 had retroactive effect, which it does not. 
    2015 Idaho Sess. Laws 240
    -41; State v. Leary, 
    160 Idaho 349
    , 353-54, 
    372 P.3d 404
    , 408-09 (2016).
    Accordingly, the district court did not err in applying the prior rule that a period of incarceration
    that is a term and condition of probation will not be credited to a defendant whose probation is
    subsequently revoked. State v. Jakoski, 
    132 Idaho 67
    , 68, 
    966 P.2d 663
    , 664 (Ct. App. 1998).
    As we hold that the district court awarded the appropriate credit, the district court’s order
    denying Mour’s Rule 35 motion is affirmed.
    2
    

Document Info

Filed Date: 10/11/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/11/2017