State v. Carngbe
288 Neb. 347
Neb.2014Background
- Wellington J. Carngbe was arrested Aug. 25, 2012, for a home-invasion-related stop; items linking him to an earlier Aug. 21, 2012 burglary were later found.
- He was held in custody Aug. 26–Oct. 16, 2012 and Oct. 21, 2012–Mar. 10, 2013 (193 days) pending trial in a separate case (CR 12-1012) for the Aug. 24 incident; he was acquitted at that trial.
- He was later charged (CR 13-508) for the Aug. 21 burglary, arraigned May 15, 2013, pled no contest Sept. 19, 2013, and was sentenced Nov. 26, 2013 to 6–8 years’ imprisonment.
- At sentencing the district court awarded 4 days’ credit for time served on the burglary charge but refused to credit the 193 days served in the earlier, acquitted case.
- Carngbe appealed, arguing entitlement to 193 days’ credit under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 83-1,106(4) and that his 6–8 year sentence was excessive.
Issues
| Issue | Carngbe's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 83-1,106(4) requires credit for custody time served on a different charge that arose from conduct occurring before the arrest | § 83-1,106(4) entitles him to credit for the 193 days he spent in custody on the earlier charge because the later prosecution arose from conduct that occurred prior to his arrest | § 83-1,106(4) should apply only when the later prosecution is for the same or related conduct as the former charge | Court held § 83-1,106(4) applies; no same-or-related-conduct requirement; modified sentence to credit 197 days (193 + 4) |
| Whether the 6–8 year sentence was excessive | Sentence was excessive given circumstances (implicit) | Sentence within statutory limits and supported by defendant’s record and conduct | Court held sentence not excessive and did not abuse discretion; affirmed as modified |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Wills, 285 Neb. 260, 826 N.W.2d 581 (Neb. 2013) (questions of entitlement and amount of credit for time served are questions of law)
- State v. Ramirez, 285 Neb. 203, 825 N.W.2d 801 (Neb. 2013) (statutory interpretation is reviewed de novo)
- State v. Schanaman, 286 Neb. 125, 835 N.W.2d 66 (Neb. 2013) (courts give statutory language its plain and ordinary meaning)
- State v. Dixon, 286 Neb. 334, 837 N.W.2d 496 (Neb. 2014) (appellate review of sentencing for abuse of discretion)
- State v. Dixon, 282 Neb. 274, 802 N.W.2d 866 (Neb. 2011) (definition of abuse of discretion in sentencing)
Conclusion: The Nebraska Supreme Court modified the judgment to award 197 days’ credit (193 days from the earlier acquitted detention plus 4 days on the present charge) and otherwise affirmed the 6–8 year sentence.