Summary 2007 WY 137

Summary of Decision issued August 24, 2007

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses "Universal Citation" and was given an "official" citation when issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will note that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation, the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion should include the reporter page number. If you need assistance, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Merta v. State

Citation: 2007 WY 137

Docket Number: 06-227

Appeal from the District Court of Fremont County, the Honorable Norma E. Young, Judge

Representing Appellant (Defendant): Jeremy George Merta, Pro se.

Representing Appellee (Plaintiff): Patrick J. Crank, Attorney General; Terry L. Armitage, Deputy Attorney General; D. Michael Pauling, Senior Assistant Attorney General; and Timothy J. Forwood, Assistant Attorney General.

Issue: Whether the denial of Merta’s motion to correct illegal sentence after finding that Merta was properly credited for his time served, was an abuse of the district court’s discretion.

Facts/Discussion: Merta challenged the order of the district court that denied his motions to modify his sentence and/or to correct an illegal sentence. The Court noted that in Renfro v. State, they held that credit will be automatically granted for presentence incarceration time on all sentences. The Court also noted they adopted the goal of the ABA Standards for Criminal Justice for the purpose to end technical distinctions by granting a comprehensive credit that treated all periods of confinement attributable to the underlying criminal transaction as equivalent no matter what label is attached to such incarceration. The Court stated they continue to recognize that a sentence that does not include proper credit for presentence incarceration is illegal. The record on appeal is not entirely clear principally because Merta did not appeal from any of the district court’s appealable orders, except for the most recent ones. Merta did not document his claims with supporting evidence, cogent argument, or pertinent authority.
In addition, Merta appeared to have asserted that the Wyoming Department of Corrections has erred in keeping his records. The Court stated that was a matter to be taken up administratively through the Department of Corrections and would be subject to the Court’s review only to the extent such an issue reached the Court via W.R.A.P. 12.

Holding: To the extent the record is clear Merta received credit for time in excess of that which is required by the Court’s longstanding rules. The orders of the district court denying Merta’s motions to modify his sentence and/or correct an illegal sentence are affirmed.

Affirmed.

J. Hill delivered the decision.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/2fdbev .