2010AP1955-CR State v. Harris

Listen to this article

Sentencing
Good time; consecutive sentences

Where a defendant receives consecutive sentences, one to prison, and one to jail, he is not entitled to any good time pursuant to sec. 302.43.

“As the State correctly points out, Harris’s sentences must be considered together. WISCONSIN STAT. § 302.113(4) requires all consecutive sentences imposed for crimes committed after December 31, 1999, to be computed as one continuous sentence. As noted, construing the sentences as one continuous sentence puts them squarely under the purview of WIS. STAT. § 973.01, which in turn means that no good time credit can be awarded because both offenses are ‘violent.’ See WIS. STAT. § 302.113(1) & (2)(b)7.; WIS. STAT. § 301.048(2)(bm)1. Moreover, WIS. STAT. § 973.03(2) provides: ‘[a] defendant sentenced to the Wisconsin state prisons and to a county jail or house of correction for separate crimes shall serve all sentences whether concurrent or consecutive in the state prisons.’ In light of § 973.03(2), Harris was not, nor would he ever become, an inmate of a county jail or house of correction. He did, on the other hand, become an inmate of the state prison system. Therefore, Harris could not be awarded any good time credit under county jail rules.”

“We therefore hold that because the trial court was required to construe Harris’s sentences as a single sentence, which put the sentences under the purview of WIS. STAT. § 973.01—and because Harris was, under the terms of the statutes, an inmate of the prison system rather than the county jail—that WIS. STAT. § 302.43, the county jail ‘good time’ statute, does not apply to his sentence. Rather, we hold that WIS. STAT. §§ 302.113(1), (2)(b)7. & (4); 301.048(2)(bm)1.; and 973.03(2) prohibited Harris from earning any credit on his sentence for violent offenses. Moreover, we do not agree with Harris’s contention that our holding would render the specific language of WIS. STAT. § 973.155(3) meaningless. The language Harris highlights, which provides that sentence credit ‘shall be computed as if the convicted offender had served such time in the institution to which he or she has been sentenced,’ see id. (emphasis added), still has effect in the myriad of other cases where a defendant is not sentenced to both the house of correction and prison.”

Affirmed.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

2010AP1955-CR State v. Harris

Dist. I, Milwaukee County, Wagner, Borowski, JJ., Curley, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Pinix, Matthew S., Milwaukee; For Respondent: Loebel, Karen A., Milwaukee; Weinstein, Warren D., Madison

Full Text