9 NICS App. 97, REEVES V. TULALIP (April 2010)
IN THE TULALIP TRIBAL COURT OF APPEALS
TULALIP INDIAN RESERVATION
TULALIP, WASHINGTON
Conrad Reeves, Petitioner,
v.
The Tulalip Tribes, Respondent.
No. TUL-CR-DV-2009-0510 (April 12, 2010)
SYLLABUS*
Trial court issued orders extending jail time for a prisoner on the date the prisoner was to be released. Petitioner filed petition for writ of habeas corpus. Finding that the prisoner had completed his sentence and had not violated any conditions of his sentence, The Court of Appeals orders the petitioner to be released.
Before: Jane Smith, Chief Justice.
OPINION
This matter comes before the Court upon request by Petitioner upon a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Petitioner is seeking release from jail alleging that he has completed his sentence and it would be unlawful to continue to hold him.
FACTS
Petitioner violated Tulalip law and was incarcerated on three charges. He entered guilty pleas to two of the charges and a third was dismissed. Sentence was imposed on January 14, 2010. An amended Judgment and Sentence was entered on February 1, 2010 which corrected an error in paperwork, but which did not modify the original sentence.
Petitioner was to have completed his jail service on April 7, 2010. On that date, the Court entered additional orders which extended his jail time by 30 days. No motion for violation of any of the conditions imposed was filed.
9 NICS App. 97, REEVES V. TULALIP (April 2010) p. 98
DECISION
Tulalip law allows modification of sentences after a judicial finding that conditions of the suspension have been violated. In this case, there has been no such finding. It appears that the only reason that the 30 day extension was imposed is that the Behavioral Health program was unable to secure a bed date for Petitioner in a timely manner. This appears not to be the fault of Petitioner, thus is not a ground for finding a violation of the original sentence. The language in the original sentence does not impose a condition that Petitioner would be held in jail if a bed date was not secured or until a bed date was secured. To now impose this condition violates his due process rights. He has completed the jail time imposed by the Court, he has done nothing to violate any of the conditions imposed and should not be penalized for something beyond his control. While the Court may have a concern about Petitioner’s release from jail, the Court may not violate Petitioner’s tights by holding him without authority to do so.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, that the Snohomish County jail shall immediately release Petitioner.
The syllabus is not a part of the Court’s Opinion. The syllabus is a summary of the Opinion prepared by the publishers of this reporter only for the convenience of the reader. Therefore, the syllabus should not be cited in whole or part as legal authority. Only the Opinion, which follows the syllabus, may be cited as legal authority.