Wilson v. State

• Decision Date: 25 May 2007
• Docket Number: CR-06-0381.
• Citation: 981 So.2d 441
• Parties: Shenderryl K. WILSON v. STATE of Alabama.
• Court: Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals

981 So.2d 441 Shenderryl K. WILSON
v.
STATE of Alabama. CR-06-0381. Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama. May 25, 2007.

[981 So.2d 442]

Shenderryl K. Wilson, pro se.

Kim T. Thomas, gen. counsel, Department of Corrections, for appellee.

BASCHAB, Presiding Judge.

The appellant, Shenderryl K. Wilson, an inmate incarcerated at Donaldson Correctional Facility, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that he has not been credited with sufficient time for the time he spent in jail awaiting trial. After the Alabama Department of Corrections ("DOC") responded, the circuit court summarily denied the petition. This appeal followed.

The appellant argues that the circuit court erroneously summarily denied his petition. In his petition, he asserted that, in case number CC-02-4267 and case number CC-02-5973, he was incarcerated from April 15, 2002, until April 7, 2003; that he has not been credited with all of the time he spent in jail awaiting trial in those cases; and that he is entitled to credit for all of the time he spent in jail awaiting trial in those cases.

"A petition for a writ of habeas corpus is the proper method by which to test whether the State has correctly calculated the time an inmate must serve in prison. Swicegood v. State, 646 So.2d 158 (Ala.Cr.App.1993). Section 15-18-5, Ala.Code 1975, requires that a convicted person be `credited with all of his actual time spent incarcerated pending trial for such offense. The actual time spent incarcerated pending trial shall be certified by the circuit clerk or district clerk on forms to be prescribed by the Board of Corrections.'"

Graves v. State, 710 So.2d 535, 536 (Ala. Crim.App.1997). Furthermore,

"[w]hen the State responds to a habeas corpus petition merely by making broad, general arguments that do not address the petitioner's specific claims, the State has failed to refute the facts alleged by the appellant and those facts must

981 So.2d 443

therefore be taken as true. Swicegood. See also Boutwell [v. State, 488 So.2d 33, 34 (Ala.Crim.App.1986)] (`The State offered no facts which contradict those set out in the petition. Therefore, the unrefuted facts set out in the petition must be taken as true.')."

Mintz v. State, 675 So.2d 1356, 1357-58 (Ala.Crim.App.1995).

In this case, DOC did not refute the appellant's specific allegation that he is entitled to additional credit for the time he spent in jail awaiting trial. Rather, it attached an affidavit from Kathy Holt, the Correctional Records Director for DOC, in which she stated that DOC awards jail credit as certified by the circuit clerk; that it had awarded sixty-five days of jail credit in case number CC-02-4267 and no jail...