Commonwealth v. Mann 2008 PA Super 215
Topic: Allocation of Jail Time-Parole Violator
Brief Legal Summary: If the defendant has a detainer and has failed to post bond on his new charge, the time in must go to the new charge. If the new sentence is shorter than the time served, the sentencing court must indicate that time is served for the excess time to go the parole violation.
Case Summary: Appellant Steven Mann was convicted of DUI, possession of drug paraphernalia, and terroristic threats. At sentencing, counsel requested and the trial court ordered that the time Mann spent in jail would not be applied to his new charges, but to his parole violation. The Superior Court held that “the sentencing court must include credit for time served in the order imposing sentence for an appellant’s new offenses.”
In this case, Mann was previously convicted and sentenced to four to eight years in prison in 1998. He was paroled in 2004. While on parole, Mann was arrested and charged with DUI, possession of drug paraphernalia, and terroristic threats in 2005. The state parole board lodged a detainer. Mann was convicted after a jury trial and sentenced to one and half to three years in prison in 2006. On the request of Mann’s attorney, the trial court ordered that none of the time Mann served since his 2005 arrest would go to his one and a half to three year sentence and that the time would go to his parole violation. The parole board sentenced Mann to nine months of back time.
The Superior Court concluded:
- The trial court erred by not giving Mann credit for the time served.
- The power to give time served rests solely with the trial court.
- If a defendant has an active detainer and has failed to post bond on his new charges, the time in must first go to the new charges.
- If there is extra time, the trial court must specify “time served” for the excess time to be applied to the parole violation.