Monday, March 19, 2012

Summary 2012 WY 40

Summary of Decision March 19, 2012


[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will also note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation to a quote the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion will need to have the reporter page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance]

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court
Case Name: Joseph Dax v. The State of Wyoming

Docket Number: S-11-0182

URL: http://wyomcases.courts.state.wy.us/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=465269

Appeal from the District Court of Natrona County, Honorable David B. Park, Judge

Representing Appellant (Plaintiff/Defendant): Joseph F. Dax, Pro se.

Representing Appellee (Plaintiff/Defendant): Gregory A. Phillips, Wyoming Attorney General; Terry L. Armitage, Deputy Attorney General; D. Michael Pauling, Senior Assistant Attorney General; and Justin A. Daraie, Assistant Attorney General.

Date of Decision: March 19, 2012

Facts: Joseph F. Dax filed this pro se appeal contesting an order denying him credit for time served. Dax claimed he should have received credit against his state sentence for time spent in pre-trial detention on a federal charge.

Issues: Although no issue was stated in Dax’s brief, he argued in the body of his brief that his state sentence should have been credited with time served, beginning from his date of arrest on the federal charge.

Holdings: Res judicata bars review of the issue raised by Dax because he did not take advantage of the opportunity to raise it multiple times before. In this case, he did not show good cause to excuse those failures. Affirmed.

Justice Hill delivered the opinion for the court.

No comments:

Check out our tags in a cloud (from Wordle)!