Jeffery Thompson v. State of Indiana , 120 N.E.3d 1066 ( 2019 )

FILED
Mar 15 2019, 9:23 am
CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Stacy R. Uliana Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Bargersville, Indiana Attorney General
Caroline G. Templeton
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Jeffery Thompson, March 15, 2019
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
18A-CR-1947
v. Appeal from the Marion Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Helen W. Marchal,
Appellee-Plaintiff Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
49G15-1604-F6-13322
Crone, Judge.
Case Summary
[1] Jeffery Thompson appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion to credit his
sentence with 240 days that he served on pretrial home detention. The State
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-CR-1947 | March 15, 2019 Page 1 of 9
does not oppose the motion. We conclude that the trial court erred in denying
Thompson’s motion and therefore reverse and remand with instructions to
credit that time to Thompson’s sentence.
Facts and Procedural History
[2] In April 2016, the State charged Thompson with one count of level 6 felony
operating while intoxicated endangering another person and one count of level
6 felony operating while intoxicated with an alcohol concentration equivalent
of .15 or more. On June 26, 2018, pursuant to a written plea agreement,
Thompson agreed to plead guilty to the first charge. The State agreed to
dismiss the second charge and all the charges that Thompson had pending in
cause number 49G15-1512-F6-45853 and cause number 49G15-1701-F6-3764
(“Cause 3764”). In Cause 3764, Thompson had been ordered to serve pretrial
home detention from January 31, 2017, through September 28, 2017, a total of
240 days. He completed the home detention with no violations. Thompson
and the State agreed to a total sentence of 730 days and also agreed that the
credit time earned in Cause 3764 would be applied to that sentence.
[3] The trial court accepted the plea agreement and sentenced Thompson to 730
days, with ten days executed and the rest suspended to probation. The court
awarded Thompson sixty days of good time credit for his pretrial home
detention in Cause 3764. See Ind. Code § 35-50-6-3.1(f) (providing that a
person placed on pretrial home detention “earns one (1) day of good time credit
for every four (4) days the person serves on pretrial home detention awaiting
trial.”). Thompson requested additional credit for the 240 days that he actually
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-CR-1947 | March 15, 2019 Page 2 of 9
served on home detention. The State did not object to this request, and the trial
court took it under advisement. On June 27, 2018, Thompson filed a motion to
apply the 240 days against his sentence, which the trial court summarily denied.
This appeal ensued.
Discussion and Decision
[4] Thompson contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for credit
for time that he served on pretrial home detention. The State does not oppose
Thompson’s motion. For the reasons given below, we agree with Thompson.
[5] “To say that the case law has been murky on the issue of credit time for home
detainees would be an understatement.” Barker v. State, 994 N.E.2d 306, 313
(Ind. Ct. App. 2013), trans. denied (2014). Home detention may be imposed
before trial, as a post-conviction placement in a community corrections
program, or as part of probation. Id. In Capes v. State, 634 N.E.2d 1334, 1335
(Ind. 1994), our supreme court considered whether the defendant was entitled
to credit for time served in pretrial home detention. At that time, Indiana Code
Section 35-50-6-4 provided, “A person imprisoned for a crime or imprisoned
awaiting trial or sentencing is initially assigned to Class I.” And Indiana Code
Section 35-50-6-3(a) provided, “A person assigned to Class I earns one (1) day
of credit time for each day he is imprisoned for a crime or confined awaiting
trial or sentencing.” For the Capes court, “[t]he essential questions [were]
whether [Capes] was a member of Class I and whether in-home detention
constitu[ed] ‘confinement’ for purposes of accruing” credit for time served. 634
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-CR-1947 | March 15, 2019 Page 3 of 9
N.E.2d at 1335. The court answered both questions in the affirmative, noting
that the legislature had specifically provided credit for time served to post-
conviction home detainees in community corrections programs and that there
was “no good reason” to treat pretrial home detainees differently. See id. (citing
Ind. Code § 35-38-2.6-6, which stated, “A person who is placed in a community
corrections program under this chapter is entitled to earn credit time under IC
35-50-6.”).
[6] Three years later, the court was confronted with the same issue in Franklin v.
State, 685 N.E.2d 1062 (Ind. 1997). This time, however, the court reached a
different result based on the legislature’s post-Capes amendment to Section 35-
38-2.6-6, which stated, “A person who is placed in a community corrections
program under this chapter is entitled to earn credit time under IC 35-50-6 unless
the person is placed in the person’s home.” (Emphasis added.) The Franklin court
concluded “that the amendment to the post-conviction home detention statute
evinces legislative intent that credit time [i.e., credit for time served] can no
longer be awarded to pretrial home detainees.” 685 N.E.2d at 1064.
[7] Just two years later, in Purcell v. State, 721 N.E.2d 220 (Ind. 1999), the court
determined that the “credit time” mentioned in Section 35-38-2.6-6 was actually
“good time credit” (i.e., the “additional credit a prisoner receives for good
behavior and educational attainment”) and not credit for time served, id. at 222,
and therefore overruled Franklin to the extent it held that the statute “prohibits
an offender sentenced to home detention under a community corrections
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-CR-1947 | March 15, 2019 Page 4 of 9
program from earning credit for time served[.]” Id. at 224. The court went on
to say,
We recognize that this conclusion casts doubt on the continued
viability of the holding in Franklin itself, to wit, that pre-trial time
served on home detention does not count as credit toward a
sentence subsequently imposed. Although not directly before us
today, we have revisited the question and conclude that a trial
court is within its discretion to deny a defendant credit toward
sentence for pre-trial time served on home detention. Absent
legislative direction, we believe that a defendant is only entitled
to credit toward sentence for pre-trial time served in a prison, jail
or other facility which imposes substantially similar restrictions
upon personal liberty.
Id. at n.6.
[8] Many legislative changes have been made in the nearly two decades since
Purcell. For example, the legislature has specifically defined the various types of
“credit” available to imprisoned or confined persons. Enacted in 2015, Indiana
Code Section 35-50-6-0.5 provides,
The following definitions apply throughout this chapter:
(1) “Accrued time” means the amount of time that a person is
imprisoned or confined.
(2) “Credit time” means the sum of a person’s accrued time,
good time credit, and educational credit.
(3) “Educational credit” means a reduction in a person’s term of
imprisonment or confinement awarded for participation in an
educational, vocational, rehabilitative, or other program.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-CR-1947 | March 15, 2019 Page 5 of 9
(4) “Good time credit” means a reduction in a person’s term of
imprisonment or confinement awarded for the person’s good
behavior while imprisoned or confined.
[9] The legislature has also revamped the statutes governing credit time classes.
Persons convicted before July 1, 2014, were assigned to one of four classes: I,
II, III, or IV. Ind. Code § 35-50-6-3. Persons convicted after June 30, 2014,
have been assigned to one of four new classes: A, B, C, or D. Ind. Code § 35-
50-6-3.1. And, effective July 1, 2016, persons “placed on home detention
awaiting trial,” such as Thompson, have been assigned to Class P. Ind. Code §
35-50-6-4(i). “This subsection does not apply to any other person placed on
home detention[,]” and “[a] person assigned to Class P may not be reassigned
to another credit time class while the person is on pretrial home detention
awaiting trial.” Id.
[10] In addition, the legislature has amended Section 35-38-2.6-6, which now
provides,
(a) As used in this subsection, “home” means the actual living
area of the temporary or permanent residence of a person.
(b) A person confined on home detention in a community
corrections program receives one (1) day of accrued time for each
day the person is confined on home detention, plus any earned
good time credit.
(c) In addition to accrued time under subsection (b), a person
who is placed in a community corrections program under this
chapter is entitled to earn good time credit under IC 35-50-6-3
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-CR-1947 | March 15, 2019 Page 6 of 9
and IC 35-50-6-3.1. A person confined on home detention as
part of a community corrections program may not earn
educational credit under IC 35-50-6-3.3.
(d) A person who is placed in a community corrections program
under this chapter may be deprived of earned good time credit as
provided under rules adopted by the department of correction
under IC 4-22-2.
Thus, the statute allows post-conviction home detainees in community
corrections programs to earn both accrued time (calculated at a day for a day)
and good time credit.
[11] And finally, Section 35-50-6-3.1 now provides,
(a) This section applies to a person who commits an offense after
June 30, 2014.
(b) A person assigned to Class A earns one (1) day of good time
credit for each day the person is imprisoned for a crime or
confined awaiting trial or sentencing.
(c) A person assigned to Class B earns one (1) day of good time
credit for every three (3) days the person is imprisoned for a
crime or confined awaiting trial or sentencing.
(d) A person assigned to Class C earns one (1) day of good time
credit for every six (6) days the person is imprisoned for a crime
or confined awaiting trial or sentencing.
(e) A person assigned to Class D earns no good time credit.
(f) A person assigned to Class P earns one (1) day of good time
credit for every four (4) days the person serves on pretrial home
detention awaiting trial.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-CR-1947 | March 15, 2019 Page 7 of 9
[12] Thompson correctly observes that, “[d]espite the statute’s silence, every other
credit time classification listed in [Section 35-50-6-3.1] earns accrued time in
addition to good time credit.” Appellant’s Br. at 7 (citing Abney v. State, 79
N.E.3d 942, 955 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017) (defendant assigned to Class B received
295 days of accrued time for 295 days of confinement in jail awaiting trial and
sentencing)). He argues that “[i]t was unnecessary for the legislature to
specifically state that a person in Class P receives accrued time because like
those in the other credit time classes, it is implied.” Id. at 8. He also argues
that “[i]f the legislature intended to treat those on pretrial home detention and
those incarcerated awaiting trial differently for purposes of accrued time, it
would have so specified.” Id. We agree on both counts. See Abney v. State, 811
N.E.2d 415, 419 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (“It is just as important to recognize what
the statute does not say as it is to recognize what it does say.”), adopted by 821
N.E.2d 375 (Ind. 2005).
[13] Thompson further observes that he “was unable to find any situation in the
Indiana Code where a defendant can earn ‘good time credit’ without also
earning accrued time.” Id. at 8. We were also unable to find any such
situation, which leads us to conclude that the legislature could not have
intended such an absurd result. See Study v. State, 24 N.E.3d 947, 956 (Ind.
2015) (courts will not presume that legislature intended statutory language to
bring about an absurd result), cert. denied. Finally, we point out that there is no
indication that the legislature intended to treat pretrial and post-conviction
home detainees differently under the current statutory scheme.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-CR-1947 | March 15, 2019 Page 8 of 9
[14] Based on the numerous substantive legislative changes regarding credit time
that have been enacted since Purcell, we conclude that Purcell is no longer good
law with respect to accrued time for pretrial home detention. See Horn v.
Hendrickson, 824 N.E.2d 690, 694 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (noting that supreme
court precedent is binding on this Court “until it is changed either by that court
or by legislative enactment.”) (quoting Dragon v. State, 774 N.E.2d 103, 107
(Ind. Ct. App. 2002), trans. vacated). We hold that a person placed on pretrial
home detention earns accrued time (calculated at a day for a day) pursuant to
the unmistakable implications of Section 35-50-6-3.1 and that the trial court has
no discretion to deny it. See Maciaszek v. State, 75 N.E.3d 1089, 1092 (Ind. Ct.
App. 2017) (“Good time credit under [Section 35-50-6-3] is a ‘matter of
statutory right, not a matter of judicial discretion.’”) (quoting Weaver v. State,
725 N.E.2d 945, 948 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000)), trans. denied; see also Purdue v. State,
51 N.E.3d 432, 436 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (“Credit time statutes, as remedial
legislation, should be liberally construed in favor of those benefitted by the
statute.”). Therefore, we reverse the trial court’s denial of Thompson’s motion
and remand with instructions to apply the 240 days of accrued time to his
sentence.
[15] Reversed and remanded.
Vaidik, C.J., and Mathias, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-CR-1947 | March 15, 2019 Page 9 of 9