Opinion No. 23
from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District,
State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Jason D. Scott, District
denying motion for credit for time served, affirmed.
D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Sally J.
Cooley, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for
Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen,
Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.
Anthony Hiatt appeals from the district court's order
denying Hiatt's motion for credit for time served. He
argues that the district court erred when it denied
Hiatt's request for credit for time served as a condition
of probation. For the reasons below, we affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
March 2010, Hiatt was found guilty of felony domestic
assault, Idaho Code §§ 18-918(3)(b), 18-903(b). The
district court imposed a unified five-year sentence, with a
two-year determinate term, but after a period of retained
jurisdiction, suspended the sentence and placed Hiatt on
probation. One of the terms of Hiatt's probation was a
suspended sixty-day jail term, which could be imposed at the
discretion of his probation officer with the court's
January 10, 2011, the district court approved fourteen days
of discretionary jail time at the request of Hiatt's
probation officer. On January 19, 2011, while still in
custody serving the discretionary jail time, Hiatt was served
with an arrest warrant for a reported probation violation.
After this probation violation, and a subsequent violation in
2012, the district court continued Hiatt on probation. Hiatt
later admitted to a third probation violation in 2013, at
which point the district court entered an order revoking
probation and ordering execution of the original sentence. At
this time, the court calculated Hiatt's credit for time
served as sixty-nine days in an order dated April 30, 2013.
Hiatt filed an Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion for a reduction
of his sentence, which the district court denied. Hiatt then
appealed that denial, which this Court affirmed. See
State v. Hiatt, Docket No. 40990 (Ct. App. Mar. 14,
Hiatt's Rule 35 appeal was pending, he filed a motion for
credit for time served. The district court granted
Hiatt's motion, awarding him credit for 548 days served
in an order dated August 9, 2013. The district court
specifically declined to grant credit for the eight days
served January 10-19, 2011, reasoning, "It is within the
Court's discretion to grant or deny credit for time
served as a term of probation. With respect to those eight
(8) days, the Court declines to grant credit."
January 2016, Hiatt moved for credit for the time he served
as a condition of probation. In asking for credit for the
eight days he served in January 2011 at the discretion of his
probation officer, Hiatt cited to amendments made in 2015 to
the code provisions governing the calculation of credit for
time served. The district court denied the motion, reasoning
that the laws in effect in 2013, when Hiatt's sentence
was ordered into execution, did not award defendants credit
for time served as a condition of probation. Moreover, the
2015 statutory amendments did not apply retroactively to the
court's 2013 order. Hiatt timely appeals.
argues the district court erred when it denied Hiatt's
motion seeking recalculation of credit for time served as a
condition of probation. He maintains that he is entitled to
credit for the eight days he ...