Case Title: Small v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: wyoming

Court: Wyoming Supreme Court

Date: 1981-02-19T00:00:00Z

Document:
Small v. State1995 WY 210908 P.2d 975Case Number: 95-46Decided: 12/22/1995Supreme Court of Wyoming
Benjamin J. SMALL, 

Appellant 
(Defendant),

v.

The STATE of Wyoming, 

Appellee 
(Plaintiff).

Appeal from The District 
Court, Laramie County, Edward L. Grant, J.

Benjamin J. 
Small, pro se.

William U. Hill, 
Attorney General; Paul S. Rehurek, Deputy Attorney General; D. Michael Pauling, 
Senior Assistant Attorney General; and Mark T. Moran, Assistant Attorney 
General, Cheyenne, for appellee.

Before 
GOLDEN, C.J., and THOMAS, MACY, TAYLOR, and LEHMAN, 
JJ.

TAYLOR, 
Justice.

[¶1]      Appellant, acting 
pro se, challenges the district court's decision to deny him credit for 
presentence incarceration.

[¶2]      We 
affirm.

I. 
ISSUES

[¶3]      Appellant 
identifies one issue for our review:

Was the trial court's 
denial of appellant's motion for presentence confinement credit 
proper?

[¶4]      Appellee 
identifies the same issue:

I.          
Did the district court properly deny appellant's motion for pre-sentence 
confinement credit?

II. 
FACTS

[¶5]      Appellant, 
Benjamin J. Small (Small), was convicted of involuntary manslaughter and, 
pursuant to the habitual criminal statute, was sentenced to life in prison. The 
Governor of the State of Wyoming commuted Small's life sentence to a term of 
years. After his life sentence was commuted, Small filed a motion seeking 
presentence credit against the term of years he received following the 
commutation. The district court denied the motion and this appeal 
follows.

III. 
DISCUSSION

[¶6]      Small argues he 
is entitled to presentence incarceration credit and that the district court 
erred when it failed to apply that time against the term of years he received 
after the Governor commuted his life sentence. We disagree. In Weldon v. State, 
800 P.2d 513, 514-15 (Wyo. 1990), we anticipated this precise scenario. In 
Weldon, we held that no credit would be applied to a term of years that was 
created as a result of the commutation of a life sentence. Id. We reasoned that 
"the Governor and the recommending body of the parole board can and would take 
into account presentence confinement," and we concluded that "no credit will be 
applied judicially to the executive entry of commutation." Id. at 514. Although 
we were discussing future possibilities in Weldon, the future has now arrived. 
Therefore, we specifically hold that no credit will be given for presentence 
confinement against a term of years that results from the executive commutation 
of a life sentence.

IV. 
CONCLUSION

[¶7]      The district 
court properly denied the motion and the decision is 
affirmed.