IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

OP 24-0510 

ALEXANDER THOMAS WARD, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

JAMES SALMONSEN, WARDEN, 

Montana State Prison, 

Respondent. 

ORDER 

FILED 

SEP 17 2024 

Bowen Greenwood 

Clerk of Supreme Court 

State of rvIontana 

Alexander Thomas Ward petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus, asserting 

that he is entitled to more jail time and elapsed time credit under his recent sentence upon 

revocation. 

Ward contends that the Department of Corrections (DOC) has incorrectly calculated 

his sentence, which illegally extends his discharge date. He states that the length of his 

sentence is longer than the law allows. Ward puts forth that his "revocation was based on 

getting a new charge, which was dismissed after [the revocation]." He further states that 

he "would not have pled guilty if [he were not] entitled to a suspended sentence." Lastly, 

he adds that his counsel was ineffective and that he was not given credit for time served on 

his initial arrest [and] probation time served subsequently." Ward requests his release from 

prison, reduction of his sentence or reinstatement of his deferred sentence, and 

compensation "for illegally making [him] serve prison time." 

This Court observes, at the outset, that Ward has not provided any supporting 

documents, judgments, or even the court where his sentence was revoked. Ward, as a 

Petitioner, carries the burden in a petition for habeas corpus relief that a writ should issue. 

Miller v. Eleventh Judicial Dist. Ct., 2007 MT 58, ¶ 14, 336 Mont. 207, 154 P.3d 1186. 

Ward must present a record that is a sufficient showing of the District Court violating or 

09/17/2024

Case Number: OP 24-0510
denying "his constitutional, statutory, or legal rights." Miller, ¶ 14. He has not done so. 

We secured copies of the judgments and petition to revoke from the Fourth Judicial 

District Court, Missoula County. In May 2023, the District Court accepted Ward's guilty 

pleas to two felony counts of criminal possession of dangerous drugs. On June 30, 2023, 

the court deferred imposition of two, concurrent three-year terms and imposed 

probationary conditions. The court awarded fifteen days of jail time credit. He did not 

appeal. 

The State petitioned to revoke his defen•ed sentence in November 2023, alleging 

two non-compliance violations and a compliance violation. On February 5, 2024, Ward 

appeared for sentencing after violations of his conditions had been established. The court 

committed Ward to the DOC for two, concurrent five-year terms with three years 

suspended. The court also awarded credit for time served as well as elapsed tiine: fifteen 

days for the prior jail time credit; sixty-six days of jail time credit prior to the revocation; 

and elapsed time or street time credit of three months. Ward did not appeal. 

Upon review, we conclude that Ward's arguments lack merit. The District Court 

awarded him credit appropriately, and the DOC has correctly calculated his sentence upon 

revocation. We point out that Ward has not shown otherwise. When faced with a 

revocation of a deferred sentence after the District Court has found "that the offender has 

violated the terms and conditions," the court may "revoke the suspension of the sentence 

and require the offender to serve . . . any sentence that could have been imposed that does 

not include a longer imprisomnent or commitment term than the original sentence[.]" 

Section 46-18-203(7)(a)(iii), MCA. Here, the District Court revoked Ward's three-year 

deferred imposition of sentence, and imposed a two-year term of incarceration with three 

years suspended. The maximum punishment for two felony counts of criminal possession 

of dangerous drugs could have been two consecutive, five-year terms, or ten years of 

imprisonment. Section 45-9-102(2), MCA. Under Montana law, Ward has a valid 

sentence which is not any longer than provided by statute. 

2 
Any claim about ineffectiveness of counsel could be pursued in the sentencing court 

through a petition for postconviction relief. See § 46-21-101, through § 46-21-203, MCA. 

Ward has that option. 

Ward has not demonstrated an illegal sentence or illegal incarceration. Section 46-

22-101(1), MCA. Regardless of a charge's dismissal, Ward had two non-compliance 

violations precipitating his sentence upon revocation. Sections 46-18-203(10)(b), and 46-

23-1012(5), MCA. Ward is precluded from challenging his sentence upon revocation 

through a writ of habeas corpus. Section 46-22-101(2), MCA. Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that Ward's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED and 

DISMISSED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is CLOSED as of this Order's date. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and to 

Alexander Thomas Ward personally. 

P"'N DATED this )."3. My of September, 2024. 

m 4-14_ 

Justices 

3