People v. Kastning, 86CA0736
| Decision Date | 09 April 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 86CA0736,86CA0736 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Harold Lee KASTNING, Defendant-Appellant. . II. |
| Court | Colorado Court of Appeals |
Duane Woodard, Atty. Gen., Charles B. Howe, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen., Richard H. Forman, Sol. Gen., Cynthia A. Savage, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for plaintiff-appellee.
John P. Van Ness, Aspen, for defendant-appellant.
Defendant, Harold Lee Kastning, appeals the trial court's order denying his motion for postconviction relief. We reverse.
Defendant was sentenced to three consecutive two-year terms for burglary, and to concurrent one-year and 90-day terms for theft. However, he was not taken directly to the Department of Corrections; instead, his sentence was "stayed" while he was sent to the Colorado State Hospital for treatment. After treatment, defendant was returned to the county jail.
The sentencing court then modified defendant's mittimus to "stay" his imprisonment, and defendant was instead assigned to a community corrections facility, where he spent 116 days in a residential program. Although defendant's sentence was then "stayed" for another 90 days so he could complete the nonresident phase of the program, he was arrested for drunken driving shortly thereafter and brought before the court, at which time the original six-year sentence was "reimposed." Defendant was given credit for his presentence confinement at the county jail, but not for the time served at either the state hospital or community corrections.
Defendant then filed this motion pursuant to Crim. P. 35(c), in which he unsuccessfully sought credit for his presentence confinement at the state hospital and community correction. In this appeal, defendant argues that the court erred in denying him credit for the 116 days served at community corrections. We agree.
In People v. Washington, 709 P.2d 100 (Colo.App.1985), we held, upon similar facts, that when a defendant is rejected by community corrections after being initially accepted, and is then transferred to the Department of Corrections, the trial court may not increase the original sentence imposed. Although a defendant is not entitled to presentence confinement credit for time served in community corrections as a condition of probation if he is later rejected by community corrections and his probation is revoked, People v. Radar, 652 P.2d 1085 (Colo.App.1982), a defendant not on...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Beecroft v. People
...liberty is sufficiently diminished and justifies crediting the offender for the time spent in community corrections. People v. Kastning, 738 P.2d 807, 808 (Colo.App.1987) (holding that if an offender is resentenced to the DOC after initially being sentenced to community corrections, the off......
-
People v. Hoecher
...to increasing his sentence' " in violation of section 17-27-114(2), 8A C.R.S. (1991 Supp.). 804 P.2d at 231 (quoting People v. Kastning, 738 P.2d 807 (Colo.App.1987)). The court of appeals remanded the case to the district court with directions to credit Hoecher with an additional 100 days ......
-
People v. Hoecher
...on probation is entitled to credit for time served in community corrections on direct sentence if he is later rejected. People v. Kastning, 738 P.2d 807 (Colo.App.1987). Accordingly, although defendant may otherwise not be entitled to pre-sentence confinement credit for non-residential time......
-
People v. Galvin
...and impose any sentence which might originally have been imposed "without increasing the length of the sentence." People v. Kastning, 738 P.2d 807 (Colo.App.1987). Upon resentencing to the Department of Corrections, a defendant must receive credit for time served on direct sentence to commu......