416 P.3d 1050
Mont.2018Background
- In 2009 Youpee (on federal parole) committed state felony robbery; in 2010 Montana court sentenced him to 15 years with 10 years suspended and 163 days credit, expressly ordering that sentence to run concurrently with any other sentence.
- After serving the unsuspended portion he was transferred to federal custody for 845 days, then released on federal parole and concurrent state probation in 2015.
- In September 2016 the District Court revoked his suspended state sentence for probation violations and resentenced him to 10 years commitment; oral and written orders were silent on whether the new sentence ran concurrently with his federal sentence.
- The court did not award credit for the federal custody time served after discharge to state probation, and it did not state reasons for denying street-time credit.
- Youpee appealed, arguing the court failed to (1) specify concurrency with his federal sentence, (2) credit time served in federal custody, and (3) state a rationale for denying street-time credit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether revocation sentence must be specified as concurrent with federal sentence | Court failed to specify concurrency; silence effectively lengthened term | Sentence was legal despite silence | Court: Silence made sentence effectively consecutive and thus illegal under §46-18-203(7)(a)(iii) — reversal on this point |
| Whether state should credit federal custody time served after discharge to state probation | Youpee entitled to credit for federal time that ran concurrently with original state sentence | State conceded credit was required | Court: District Court erroneously failed to grant that credit — reversal on this point |
| Whether court had to state reasons for denying street-time credit | Court failed to state reasons as required by statute | State: Claim waived because sentence (apart from concurrency issue) was facially legal and no contemporaneous objection | Court: Failure to state reasons is a waivable statutory defect; Youpee waived it by not contemporaneously objecting — claim denied |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Seals, 336 Mont. 416, 156 P.3d 15 (2007) (standard of review for sentence legality)
- State v. Lenihan, 184 Mont. 338, 602 P.2d 997 (1979) (preservation rule and appellate review of illegal sentences)
- State v. Tracy, 327 Mont. 220, 113 P.3d 297 (2005) (unrelated sentences merge when court orders concurrency)
- State v. Kotwicki, 335 Mont. 344, 151 P.3d 892 (2007) (failure to contemporaneously object to statutory sentencing defects may waive review)
Conclusion: Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for entry of a corrected judgment specifying concurrency and granting credit for federal custody time consistent with this opinion.