On Point blog, page 1 of 1
Defense Win! SCOW applies Floyd, reverses COA, reinstates grant of 433 days sentence credit
State v. Michael K. Fermanich, 2023 WI 48, 6/14/23, reversing a per curiam court of appeals decision; case activity (including briefs)
The key takeaway here is that five justices reaffirm and apply State v. Floyd, 2000 WI 14, 232 Wis. 2d 767, 606 N.W.2d 155, and hold that Fermanich is entitled to 433 days sentence credit for time he spent in custody in connection with Oneida County charges that were dismissed and read-in at his Langlade County sentencing. (Opinion, ¶2). A concurrence by Justice Dallet is worth reading as a preemptive response to the dissent’s answer to the question for which the court granted review: whether State v. Tuescher should be reexamined and limited to the unique circumstances present there. A dissent by Chief Justice Ziegler and R.G. Bradley would have overruled Floyd, denied Fermanich credit under Tuescher, and required him to return to custody for an additional 433 days. (See Op., ¶19, Dallet, concurring).
Defendant not entitled to sentence credit for charges dismissed but not read in
State v. Demario D. Fleming, 2017AP1851-CR, District 1, 7/17/18 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Applying its recent decision in State v. Piggue, 2016 WI App 13, 366 Wis. 2d 605, 875 N.W.2d 663, the court of appeals rejects Fleming’s request for sentence credit for time he spent in custody on charges that were dismissed, but not read in, as part of a plea agreement.
Defendant not entitled to credit for custody in another case that was considered at sentencing
State v. David Aaron Piggue, Jr., 2016 WI App 13; case activity (including briefs)
Under State v. Floyd, 2000 WI 14, 232 Wis. 2d 767, ¶¶14-18, 25-27, 606 N.W.2d 155, a defendant is entitled to sentence credit for time in custody on charges that are dismissed and read-in for sentencing purposes. The court of appeals declines to extend Floyd to require credit for time the defendant was in custody on a charge for which he was acquitted, even though the acquitted conduct is used by a judge to fashion a sentence for a different crime.
Sentence Credit – Read-in
State v. Warrick D. Floyd, 2000 WI 14, 232 Wis. 2d 767, 606 N.W.2d 155, on certification
For Floyd: David D. Leeper
Issue: Whether a defendant is entitled to sentence credit under Wis. Stat. § 973.155(1) for time spent in custody on a charge that is dismissed and read-in at sentencing.
Holding: Pre-trial confinement on a charge dismissed and read in at sentencing is related to the sentenced offense and therefore qualifies for credit:
¶31 In limiting the statute’s scope,