Case Title: DAVID ASCH v. THE STATE OF WYOMING

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: wyoming

Court: Wyoming Supreme Court

Date: 1989-12-21T00:00:00Z

Document:
DAVID ASCH v. THE STATE OF WYOMING1989 WY 227784 P.2d 235Case Number: 89-225Decided: 12/21/1989Supreme Court of Wyoming
DAVID ASCH, APPELLANT 
(DEFENDANT),

v.

THE STATE OF 
WYOMING, 
APPELLEE (PLAINTIFF).

Appeal from the District 
Court, NatronaCounty, Dan Spangler, 
J.

David Asch, pro se.

Joseph B. Meyer, 
Atty. Gen., John W. Renneisen, Deputy Atty. Gen., Cheyenne, for appellee.

Before CARDINE, C.J., and THOMAS, URBIGKIT, MACY 
and GOLDEN, JJ.

PER 
CURIAM.

[¶1.]     Appellant, David Asch, 
seeks review of his motion for credit for jail time which was deemed 
automatically denied, pursuant to Rule 301, U.R.D.Ct.,1 after the expiration of sixty days 
without the district court acting on the motion.

[¶2.]     We 
affirm.

[¶3.]     Although no briefs have 
been filed, it is apparent that the only issue that Asch could raise here is the 
district court's denial of his motion which was implicitly made pursuant to Rule 
36, W.R.Cr.P. Since the facts of this case warrant it, we dispose of this appeal 
summarily and without briefing. McFarlane v. State, 781 P.2d 931 (Wyo. 1989); Peper v. State, 776 P.2d 761 (Wyo. 1989); Mower v. State, 770 P.2d 233 (Wyo. 
1989).

[¶4.]     Asch received 
concurrent sentences of eight to fifteen years and eight to ten years after he 
pled guilty to aggravated burglary and concealing stolen property, respectively. 
Aggravated burglary carries a maximum penalty of twenty-five years, and the 
maximum penalty for concealing stolen property is ten years. Sections 6-3-301 
and 6-3-403, W.S. 1977. The record discloses the following dialogue in open 
court:

"[PROSECUTING ATTORNEY]: 
That is correct and amend Count II to strike the habitual criminal part 
contained in count II, further as to sentencing, Mr. Asch will be sentenced to a 
term of not less than eight nor more than fifteen on Count II, and a term of not 
less than eight and no more than ten on Count III to run 
concurrent.

"[DEFENSE ATTORNEY]: That 
is without credit for time served."

Asch filed two 
pro se motions for reduction in sentence, pursuant to Rule 36, W.R. Cr.P., in 
March and June of 1988. The district court denied the first motion and never 
acted on the second. On June 22, 1989, Asch filed his motion for credit for jail 
time. Although Asch did not make a specific request concerning the number of 
days for which he claimed credit, the record indicates that his presentence 
confinement would not have exceeded 152 days. This motion was deemed denied 
sixty days later because the district court took no action on 
it.

[¶5.]     In most cases in which 
a reduction in sentence for pre-sentence confinement is sought, two factors are 
implicated. They are: (1) whether the pre-sentence confinement was attributable 
to the defendant's indigence; and (2) whether the sum of the time spent in 
custody prior to sentencing, plus the sentence, exceeded the maximum allowable 
sentence. We have said that these factors should be applied in the disjunctive 
because different concerns are the focus of each prong of the test. Indigence 
invokes the constitutional requirements of equal protection; imprisonment in 
excess of the term set by statute raises jurisdictional concerns. Lightly v. 
State, 739 P.2d 1232 (Wyo. 1987). While the record is equivocal with 
respect to the fact of indigence,2 we will assume for our purposes 
that Asch was indigent. The record demonstrates that the sum of Asch's 
pre-sentence confinement added to the sentence actually imposed did not exceed 
the maximum term of imprisonment provided by the statute. Consequently, that 
factor would not be of concern in this case.

[¶6.]     Even though we assume 
that Asch was indigent, the record justifies a conclusion that Asch was given 
credit for his pre-sentence incarceration. His plea of guilty was entered 
pursuant to a plea bargain made with the State of Wyoming. The bargain was 
that, in exchange for his plea of guilty, one of three crimes with which he was 
charged would not be prosecuted, and the prosecution and the defense agreed to 
the sentences which were imposed "without credit for time served." The clear 
agreement between Asch and the State was that he would receive the sentences 
that were imposed without being afforded any credit for time served or, 
expressed in another way, the time served was taken into account in the 
sentences that were identified in the bargain.

[¶7.]     Because the imposed 
sentences were agreed to, this case does not invoke the concerns we have 
expressed in cases where the record is unclear. Jones v. State, 771 P.2d 368 
(Wyo. 1989). 
The decision to reduce a sentence, pursuant to a motion filed in accordance with 
W.R.Cr.P. 36, lies in the broad discretion of the trial court, and we will not 
disturb its decision absent a clear abuse of that discretion. McFarlane; 
Mower.

[¶8.]     
Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1 Rule 301, U.R.D.Ct., 
states in pertinent part:

"All motions not called 
up or set for hearing within 60 days after filing will automatically be denied, 
with 10 days then allowed for pleading."

2 Numerous affidavits of 
indigency were filed in the record, but Asch was represented by privately 
retained counsel at his trial.