State v. David B. Mercer

David B. Mercer pled guilty to felony DUI; court imposed a unified 10-year sentence with a 5-year minimum and retained jurisdiction.
After retained jurisdiction the court suspended the sentence and placed Mercer on probation; as a probation condition he could serve up to 180 days in jail at his probation officer’s discretion.
Mercer served 30 days of discretionary jail time in 2012 that the district court did not count as credit when it revoked probation and executed the sentence on June 3, 2013.
Mercer moved under I.C. § 18-309 (filed Jan. 19, 2016) seeking recalculation of credit based on 2015 amendments requiring credit for time served as a probation condition.
The district court denied relief, concluding the 2015 amendments do not apply retroactively to a 2013 judgment; Mercer appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Mercer is entitled to credit for discretionary jail time served as a probation condition under the 2015 amendments to I.C. §§ 18-309 and 19-2603	The State argues the amendments do not apply retroactively and Mercer’s 2013 order stands	Mercer argues the court should apply the law in effect when he moved (post-amendment) and award the 30 days as credit	Court affirmed: amendments are not retroactive; 2013 order stands and discretionary probation time need not be credited

State v. Vasquez, 142 Idaho 67, 122 P.3d 1167 (Ct. App.) (standard of review for credit-for-time-served questions)
State v. Covert, 143 Idaho 169, 139 P.3d 771 (Ct. App.) (deference to district court factual findings)
State v. Reyes, 139 Idaho 502, 80 P.3d 1103 (Ct. App.) (statutory construction and review)
State v. Leary, 160 Idaho 349, 372 P.3d 404 (Idaho Sup. Ct.) (2015 amendment to I.C. § 18-309 not applied to judgments entered before amendment)
State v. Taylor, 160 Idaho 381, 373 P.3d 699 (Idaho Sup. Ct.) (amendments lack express retroactivity)