State v. Jones, 120199 AKDC, 3AN-99-6278 Cr

Docket Nº:3AN-99-6278 Cr.
Opinion Judge:JAMES N. WANAMAKER, DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
Party Name:State Of Alaska, Plaintiff, v. Lanetta Jones, Defendant.
Case Date:December 01, 1999
Court:District Court of Alaska
 
FREE EXCERPT

State Of Alaska, Plaintiff,

v.

Lanetta Jones, Defendant.

No. 3AN-99-6278 Cr.

District Court of Alaska, Third Judicial District

December 1, 1999

UNPUBLISHED

DECISION AND ORDER

JAMES N. WANAMAKER, DISTRICT COURT JUDGE The court has considered defendant's Motion for Nygren Credit and the State's opposition and argument thereon. Also, hearings were held on the Motion on 12/14/99 and 12/21/99.

FINDINGS OF FACT

I. THE PERIOD FROM 7/30/99 TO 10/29/99

On July 29, 1999 the court ordered that defendant could be released on bail according to the following two orders:

Ex. A ORDER AND CONDITIONS OF RELEASE, DATED 7/29/99 1 page. On 8/30/99 this order was amended to make Mrs. Lorraine Carmichael the evening custodian for an 8 day period 9/3/99 to 9/11/99 while Ms. Estell was to be out of state. That order is attached as Exhibit A-1.

Ex. B ORDER FOR NALTREXONE TREATMENT, DATED 7/29/99, 4 pages

Defendant was released pursuant to these orders on 7/30/99.

The court has heard the testimony of Donna Estell and Bobbie Carmichael, third party custodians, that defendant Lanetta Jones did, for this period, observe the conditions of house arrest at Donna Estell's home 212 Taylor, Apt 2, Anchorage, Alaska, or Bobbie Carmichael's home at 501 N. Park, Anchorage, Alaska, departing only for AA, doctor appointments, court appearances, attorney appointments or church services, and then only in the custody of a third party custodian (with the exception of the "weekends away" noted in the next section of this opinion). The court believes Ms. Estell and Mr. Carmichael and adopts the above summarized testimony as a Finding of Fact in this case.

The commonly understood definition of "custody" is a concrete building with steel bars where inmates are kept under 24 hour guard and have no freedom of movement. I find that the restrictions which were placed on and observed by the defendant in the period 7/30/99 to 10/29/99 were not equivalent to this commonly understood definition of custody.

However, the nature of custody is changing. The 1998 Alaska Legislature enacted a new law providing for service of sentence by electronic monitoring. (See AS 33.30.061(c), AS 33.30.065 and AS 12.55.015(e)(2). This type of sentence is not available however, to every defendant. It is available only to a select class of defendants who meet stringent DOC screening criteria...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP