IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA JASON LEE WEBB, ) ) Appellant, ) NOT FOR PUBLICATION ) -VS- ) No. RE-2010-10 ) THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA, ) ) Appellee. ) IN COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS STATE OF OKLAHOMA SUMMARY OPINION APR – 5 2011 LUMPKIN, JUDGE: MICHAEL S. RICHIE CLERK Appellant appeals from the revocation of five years of his suspended sentence in Case No. CF-2005-5009 in the District Court of Tulsa County, by the Honorable Clancy Smith, District Judge. Appellant was charged as a Youthful Offender, pursuant to 10 O.S.2001, § 7306-2.6(A)(9), with the offense of Lewd Molestation. On December 21, 2005, he entered a plea of guilty and was sentenced to eight years as a Youthful Offender. On April 3, 2008, the State filed a motion to bridge Appellant from the Youthful Offender system to the custody of the Department of Corrections. On December 22, 2008, the District Court granted the State’s motion to bridge, and gave Appellant a suspended sentence of eight years, with credit for time served while in the custody of Office of Juvenile Affairs since December 1, 2005. On August 6, 2009, the State filed an application to revoke Appellant’s suspended sentence alleging he violated probation by committing the offense of Failure to Register as a Sex Offender, as charged in Tulsa County District Court Case No. CF-2009-3424. On September 18, 2009, the State filed an amended application to revoke Appellant’s suspended sentence adding alleged violations that he had failed to refrain from entering or loitering around beer taverns, and that he had been discharged from and failed to complete sex offender treatment due to non-compliance. The hearing on the applications to revoke was held before Judge Smith on December 21, 2009. After hearing the evidence and arguments, Judge Smith found Appellant had violated probation, and revoked five years of his suspended sentence. Appellant asserts one proposition of error in this appeal. Appellant claims the District Court erred in revoking Appellant’s suspended sentence for five years. The State agrees that Appellant’s sentence must be modified. The Youthful Offender Act requires that Appellant be given day-for-day credit for the time spent in the custody or under the supervision of the Office of Juvenile Affairs. 10 O.S.Supp.2008, § 7306-2.10(D) (now 10A O.S.Supp.2010, § 2-5-210(D)). Appellant was either in the custody or under the supervision of the Office of Juvenile Affairs on his Youthful sentence from December 1, 2005, until December 22, 2008. When given credit for those three years and twenty- one days against his eight year sentence, Appellant’s adult suspended sentence 1 The full text of Subsection D of Section 7306-2.10 provides “[t]he court shall grant time- served credits against the adult sentence imposed for any youthful offender transferred to the Department of Corrections. For the purpose of calculating time served to be applied toward any sentence imposed upon a youthful offender, in the event a youthful offender has been placed in the custody or under the supervision of the Office of Juvenile Affairs, the offender shall receive day-for-day credit for the time spent in the custody or under the supervision of the Office of Juvenile Affairs. Upon commitment to the Department of Corrections, a youthful offender shall also receive other credits as provided by law for an adult inmate. 2 totaled four years and three hundred forty-four days. Thus, he cannot be revoked for a full five years. DECISION This Court finds that the revocation of five years of Appellant’s suspended sentence in Case No. CF-2005-5009 in the District Court of Tulsa County should be, and is hereby, MODIFIED to revocation of four years and three hundred forty-four days. The District Court is directed to enter a revised Order Revoking Suspended Sentence in accordance with this opinion. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2011), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the filing of this decision. AN APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TULSA COUNTY THE HONORABLE CLANCY SMITH, DISTRICT JUDGE APPEARANCES IN DISTRICT COURT APPEARANCES ON APPEAL ADAM L. HASELGREN RICHARD COUCH Assistant Tulsa County Public Assistant Tulsa County Public Defender Defender 423 S. Boulder Ave., Suite 300 423 S. Boulder Ave., Suite 300 Tulsa, OK 74103 Tulsa, OK 74103 COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT APRIL SEIBERT W. A. DREW EDMONDSON Assistant Tulsa County District Attorney General of Oklahoma Attorney THOMAS LEE TUCKER 900 Courthouse Assistant Attorney General 500 S. Denver Ave. 313 N.E. 21 Street Tulsa, OK 74103 Oklahoma City, OK 73105 COUNSEL FOR THE STATE COUNSEL FOR THE STATE 3 OPINION BY: LUMPKIN, J. A. JOHNSON, P.J.: CONCUR LEWIS, V.P.J.: CONCUR C. JOHNSON, J.: CONCUR SMITH, J.: RECUSE RB/F 4
RE-2010-10
Tags: Appeal Process, Assessment of Evidence, Case No. CF-2005-5009, Court Decision, Credit Calculation, Department of Corrections, District Court, Failure to Register, Judge Clancy Smith, Judicial Authority, Judicial Opinion, Legal Counsel, Legal Representation, Mandate Issued, Modification, Office of Juvenile Affairs, Okla. Stat. tit. 10 § 7306-2.10, Okla. Stat. tit. 10 § 7306-2.6, Okla. Stat. tit. 10A § 2-5-210, Probation Violation, Proposition of Error, Revocation, Sex Offender, Suspended Sentence, Time Served, Treatment Compliance, Tulsa County, Youthful Offender