Opinion
24-KH-340
08-15-2024
STATE OF LOUISIANA v. JOHN TUCKSON IN RE JOHN TUCKSON
APPLYING FOR SUPERVISORY WRIT FROM THE TWENTY-NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ST CHARLES, STATE OF LOUISIANA, DIRECTED TO THE HONORABLE CONNIE M. AUCOIN, DIVISION "C", NUMBER 21,406
Panel composed of Judges Marc E. Johnson, Scott U.Schlegel, and Timothy S. Marcel
WRIT DENIED
Relator, John Tuckson, seeks this Court's supervisory review of the trial court's May 29, 2024, ruling which denied his Motion for Clarification of Sentence.
By way of background, on January 30, 2023, relator pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to possession with the intent to distribute marijuana, possession with the intent to distribute less than 28 grams of cocaine, and possession with the intent to distribute less than 28 grams of oxycodone. He was sentenced to eight years imprisonment at hard labor on each count to run concurrently. Relator did not appeal his conviction and sentence. On May 24, 2024, he filed a Motion for Clarification of Sentence which was denied on May 29, 2024.
According to the January 30, 2023 minute entry, relator's sentences in case number 21-406 were also ordered to run concurrently with his sentences for multiple drug offenses in five different 24th Judicial District Court case numbers. The 29th Judicial District Court's database indicates that in case number 22-352, on January 30, 2023, relator also pled guilty to possession with the intent to distribute less than 28 grams of cocaine in violation of La. R.S. 40:967(A)(1); possession with the intent to distribute less than 28 grams of oxycodone in violation of La. R.S. 40:967(A)(1); and possession with the intent to distribute suboxone (La. R.S. 40:968(A)(1). On the same date, relator was sentenced to two years imprisonment at hard labor on each count, to run concurrently with each other and consecutively to his sentences in case number 21-406 and his 24th Judicial District Court sentences. Relator makes reference to case number 22-352 in his Motion for Clarification of Sentence filed with the district court.
In his writ application, relator argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for clarification of sentence. In his motion, he claims that he had not received all of his pretrial custody credits, citing La. C.Cr.P. art. 880(A), which provides that a "[d]efendant shall receive credit toward service of his sentence for time spent in actual custody prior to the imposition of sentence." According to relator, he was in custody in Jefferson Parish from April 28, 2022 through January 3, 2023 on unrelated charges, when a detainer was placed on him by the St. Charles Parish Sheriff's Office for the instant offenses. He contends that he is entitled to credit for approximately 209 days served while in custody in Jefferson Parish.
To begin, we find that relator's writ application is deficient in several respects. Relator has failed to provide any documentation, such as bills of information, pertinent court minutes, sentencing transcripts, or uniform commitment orders, regarding the alleged detainer or documentation of his convictions and sentences he received in the 29th and 24th Judicial District Courts. See Uniform Rules-Court of Appeal, Rule 4-5(C)(8) and (10). Instead, relator submits an Affidavit of Incarceration from the Jefferson Parish Correctional Center from April 28, 2022 to January 3, 2023. In addition, relator includes two certificates from self-help programs which he completed while incarcerated after his January 2023 conviction.
In any event, La. C.Cr.P. art. 880 provides as follows:
A. A defendant shall receive credit toward service of his sentence for time spent in actual custody prior to the imposition of sentence.
B. A defendant shall receive credit only for time in actual custody and only once during any calendar month when consecutive sentences are imposed.
C. No defendant shall receive credit for any time served prior to the commission of the crime.
D. A defendant shall not receive credit for time served under home incarceration.
E. A defendant shall not receive overlapping jail credit, except in the instance of concurrent sentences and then only for time spent in jail on the instant felony.
Relator asserts the trial judge failed to give him credit for time served under the statute. However, the minute entry from January 30, 2023 reflects the trial judge's intent to give relator credit for time served in case nos. 21-0406 and 22-0352 in accordance with La. C.Cr.P. art. 880. Regardless, the comment to the 1997 amendment of La. C.Cr.P. art. 880 states, "This article makes the credit for prior custody self-operating even on a silent record. It does not change the law." Thus, credit for prior custody occurs automatically by operation of law "without the necessity or formality of the trial court having to so state." See State v. Jarvis, 98522 (La.App. 1 Cir. 12/28/98), 727 So.2d 605, 609.
Inasmuch as relator's writ application questions determination of his credit for time served, actions contesting computation of sentence are governed by La. R.S. 15:571.15, which are to be brought in East Baton Rouge Parish pursuant to La. R.S. 15:571.15. See also, Billizon v. Honorable Judge 24th Judicial District Court, 18-KH-152 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/29/18) (unpublished writ disposition).
For the foregoing reasons, this writ application is denied. Gretna, Louisiana, this 15th day of August, 2024.
TSM
MEJ
SUS
SUSAN M. CHEHARDY CHIEF JUDGE FREDERICKA H. WICKER JUDE G. GRAVOIS MARC E. JOHNSON STEPHEN J. WINDHORST JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR. SCOTT U.SCHLEGEL TIMOTHY S. MARCEL JUDGES