Montana Supreme Court Requires Sentence Credit for Time Served in Tribal Jail
On March 19, 2024, the Supreme Court of Montana held that time served in tribal jails prior to sentencing must be credited to that sentence. The case involved Malinda Crazymule. After pleading guilty to felony theft and criminal trespassing in 2016 in Sixteenth Judicial District Court, Rosebud County, she received a suspended sentence and was released on probation. Then on March 3, 2021, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) tribal officers searched her home and found methamphetamine, which she admitted using. Her two grandchildren, who were also present, tested positive for methamphetamine exposure. They were removed from Crazymule’s custody, and BIA officers charged her with endangering the welfare of children and drug abuse.
Crazymule was convicted of these offenses and confined to a tribal jail. On March 18, 2021, while serving that new sentence, the State petitioned to have her suspended sentence for felony theft revoked based on the tribal court convictions. The district court issued a warrant for Crazymule’s arrest that same day. The warrant listed Crazymule’s location as the tribal jail, but she was not transported to the Rosebud County Jail and served with a copy of the revocation petition and warrant until September 3, 2021. She ultimately pleaded guilty to the violations and was sentenced to four years in prison.
The district court gave her credit for time served from the date she arrived at the Rosebud County Jail, but refused to give credit for the time served in tribal jail between the time the revocation petition was filed and she was transported to Rosebud County to answer the charges. Crazymule appealed.
The Montana Supreme Court said that three statutes determined whether Crazymule was entitled to credit for time served in tribal custody once the revocation petition was filed. MCA § 46-18-203(7)(b), which provides that “[c]redit must be allowed for time served in a detention center or for home arrest time already served.” Similarly, § 46-18-403(1), entitled “Credit for Incarceration Prior to Conviction,” provides “credit for each day of incarceration prior to or after conviction[.]” Last, § 46-18-201(9) provides “credit for time served by the offender before trial or sentencing.”
Relying on these statutes, the Court held previously that if “incarcerated on another matter or within another jurisdiction and an arrest warrant on a different charge is issued, the defendant must receive credit for time served ‘for the different charge from service of the arrest warrant to sentencing, even if the defendant may also have been incarcerated on another matter,’” quoting Killam v. Salmonsen, 492 P.3d 512 (Mont. 2021). The Court then extended that holding to situations like Crazymule’s.
Although she was not served with an arrest warrant until she completed her tribal sentence and was transported to the Rosebud County Jail, she “could do nothing to move forward on the revocation petition,” the Court noted. In fact, the pending warrant acted as a detainer prohibiting her release from the tribal jail except into the custody of Rosebud County.
Therefore, the Court concluded, the district court erred by not crediting Crazymule with nearly six months she spent in tribal custody waiting to be transported to Rosebud. Instead, the Court noted, the district court “must allow credit for ‘time served in a detention center,’” quoting § 46-18-203(7)(b). The district court’s order was thus reversed and Crazymule’s sentence remanded for correction. The prisoner was represented by Public Defender Chad Wright and Assistant Public Defender Kristina L. Neal. See: State v. Crazymule, 2024 MT 58