State v. Marco Antonio Rios-Lopez
Background
- Rios-Lopez was convicted of three counts of trafficking in cocaine and three counts of failing to affix illegal drug tax stamps; the district court imposed consecutive sentences producing a 48-year unified sentence with 24 years determinate.
- At sentencing the court awarded 253 days of credit for time served (total, not per count). Rios-Lopez appealed; the conviction became final when the remittitur issued on October 29, 2003.
- In 2016 Rios-Lopez filed an I.C.R. 35(c) motion seeking additional credit, arguing Owens required awarding the 253 days on each of the six counts (an extra 1,265 days).
- The district court denied the I.C.R. 35(c) motion; Rios-Lopez appealed that denial to this Court.
- The core statutory provision is I.C. § 18-309, which requires credit for prejudgment incarceration but only for time actually spent in custody prior to judgment.
- The Idaho Supreme Court in Owens reinterpreted § 18-309 to permit credit for the same prejudgment time against each consecutive-count sentence, but limited that new rule to prospective application and to cases on direct review when Owens was issued.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rios-Lopez is entitled to credit for prejudgment incarceration on each count under Owens | Owens requires credit of 253 days on each of the six counts, so he should get additional 1,265 days | Owens was applied only prospectively to cases on direct review when decided; Rios-Lopez's conviction was final in 2003, so Owens doesn't apply | Owens does not apply; district court correctly denied his I.C.R. 35(c) motion |
| Whether a post-judgment I.C.R. 35(c) motion constitutes "direct review" for Owens' retroactivity rule | Rios-Lopez contends I.C.R. 35(c) may be filed anytime and thus is direct review | The relevant point is whether the case was on direct review when Owens issued; it was not | Rios-Lopez's case was final in 2003, so it was not on direct review when Owens issued; Owens' non-retroactivity controls |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Owens, 158 Idaho 1, 343 P.3d 30 (Idaho 2015) (interprets § 18-309 to permit prejudgment custody credit against each consecutive-count sentence; limits application prospectively to cases on direct review)
- State v. Hoch, 102 Idaho 351, 630 P.2d 143 (Idaho 1981) (prior precedent holding prejudgment custody credit could not be applied to more than one count)
- State v. Moore, 156 Idaho 17, 319 P.3d 501 (Idaho Ct. App. 2014) (§ 18-309 requires credit for time actually served; court has no discretion to award more or less than actual prejudgment incarceration)
- Peregrina v. State, 158 Idaho 948, 354 P.3d 510 (Idaho 2015) (explains judgment is final when remittitur issues; relevant to determining whether a case was on direct review)