Credit for Time Served Includes the Time Spent with DOH in an Institution
State v. Torres (ICA April 8, 2021)
Background. Richard Torres was
charged by way of a felony information with promoting a dangerous drug in the
third degree and a park violation. The warrant was served on him and bail was
set at $11,000. He could not afford to bail out and remained in custody at the
Oahu Community Correctional Center. Torres’s counsel moved for an examination
to determine his fitness to proceed in the case pursuant to HRS Chapter 704. The
circuit court—with the Hon. Judge Paul B. K. Wong presiding—granted the motion.
More than three months the circuit court entered an order suspending
proceedings and declared Torres unfit to proceed. The order committed Torres to
the custody of the Director of Health and placed him at the Hawai'i State Hospital
or other appropriate institution. Torres was also expressly ordered that he “shall
not be authorized to leave the institution” without a prior court order. Nearly
a year went by before he was found fit to proceed to trial. The order for fitness
confirmed his pretrial status of $11,000 and returned him to OCCC.
After a bench trial, Torres was found guilty of
the felony, but not the park closure. At sentencing, Torres noted that the time
spent in the hospital must be deducted and counted as jail credit. The circuit
court disagreed and sentenced to Torres to prison for three years with credit
for time served. The circuit court also ordered Torres pay a $500 fine and the
$105 Crime Victim Compensation Fee, but all other fees were waived.
Torres filed a motion for correction, reduction of
sentence, and new trial. He argued that he was entitled to the credit for the
time spent in a mental institution. The motion was denied. He appealed.
Credit for Time Served Included the Time Spent in
the Mental Institution. The jail credit statute includes more than jail:
When a defendant who is
sentenced to imprisonment has previously been detained in any State or local correctional
or other institution . . ., such period of detention . . . shall be deducted
from the minimum and maximum terms of such sentence. The officer having custody
of the defendant shall furnish a certificate to the court at the time of sentencing,
showing the length of such detention of the defendant prior to sentence in any State
or local correctional or other institution[.]
HRS § 706-671(1). When a defendant is found to be
unfit to proceed, the court “shall commit the defendant to the custody of the
director of health to be placed in an appropriate institution for detention,
assessment, care, and treatment[.]” HRS § 704-406(1).
HRS § 706-671(1) is Plain and Unambiguous. “When there is no
ambiguity in the language of a statute, and the literal application of the
language would not produce an absurd or unjust result, clearly inconsistent
with the purposes and policies of the statute, there is no room for judicial
construction and interpretation, and the statute must be given effect according
to its plain and obvious meaning.” Tax Foundation of Hawai'i v. State,
144 Hawai'i 175, 203, 439 P.3d 127, 155 (2019).
The ICA found the language in the jail credit
statute is unambiguous. Credit must be given for time spent in a jail “or other
institution.” Moreover, the trial court “shall commit the defendant to the
custody of the director of health” upon a finding of unfitness. HRS §
704-406(1). And so the ICA held that “a criminal defendant who has been detained
pretrial in the custody of the Director of Health, in an institution for
detention, assessment, care, and treatment pursuant to HRS § 704-406, shall
receive credit for the time of detention in such institution, as well as
receive any credit due under HRS § 706-61(1) for time served in a correctional
institution.” The circuit court erred in not crediting Torres the time spent
under the custody of the Director of Health.
It’s on the Sentencing Court to Calculate the Jail
Credit. The
ICA also noted that HRS § 706-671 requires a certificate of detention indicating
the amount of time served up to sentencing. “[I]t is the duty of the sentencing
court to determine the amount of credit to be awarded the defendant when
presented with a claim for uncredited time.” State v. Mason, 79 Hawai'i 175,
184, 900 P.2d 172, 181 (App. 1995). On remand, the ICA required both the
Department of Public Safety and the Department of Health to comply with HRS §
706-671 and furnish a certificate showing the length of detention prior to
sentencing. After that, the circuit court must determine the amount of credit
to be awarded.
The Circuit Court Plainly Erred in Imposing the
Crime Victim Compensation Fee. The ICA also noted that even though Torres did not
raise the issue on appeal, the crime victim compensation fee appears to be
imposed as plain error. The circuit court found that even though Torres was
unable to pay, the fee was imposed anyway. “If it is determined that the defendant
is unable to pay the CVC fee, then the sentencing court must waive” it. State
v. Pulgados, 148 Hawai'i 361, 370, 477 P.3d 155, 164 (App. 2020). The ICA
noted that on remand, the circuit court should reconsider the imposition of the
fee.
Comments