State v. Johnson

2019 UT App 180
THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS
S TATE OF U TAH ,
Appellee,
v.
JOSEPH S HAWN JOHNSON ,
Appellant.
Per Curiam Opinion
No. 20180892-CA
Filed November 7, 2019
Fourth District Court, Provo Department
The Honorable Derek P. Pullan
No. 161402568
Douglas J. Thompson, Attorney for Appellant
Sean D. Reyes and Marian Decker, Attorneys
for Appellee
Before JUDGES D AVID N. M ORTENSEN , JILL M. POHLMAN , and
DIANA H AGEN .
PER CURIAM:
¶1 	Joseph 	Shawn 	Johnson 	appeals 	his 	sentences 	after
pleading no contest to two counts of child sexual abuse. We
affirm.
¶2 	Johnson argues that the district court abused its discretion
by not granting Johnson credit for the time he served while
wearing 	a 	GPS 	monitor 	during 	the 	pre-trial 	proceedings.
However, “it is . . . the Board of Pardons [and Parole], and not
the trial court, which has authority to grant defendant credit for
the time he served prior to conviction.” State v. Alvillar, 748 P.2d
207, 209 (Utah Ct. App. 1988); see also Rawlings v. Holden, 869
P.2d 958, 960–61 (Utah Ct. App. 1994) (“Under Utah’s sentencing
scheme, ‘the trial judge has no discretion in fixing the term of

State v. Johnson
20180892-CA 	2 	2019 UT App 180
imprisonment. 	He 	or 	she 	simply 	imposes 	the 	statutorily
prescribed range of years, and the Board of Pardons determines
exactly how long the prisoner is to be confined.”). “In other
words, the Board, not the district court, ‘determines the actual
number of years a defendant is to serve,’ . . . because the Board
‘functions 	as 	a 	sentencing 	entity 	and 	decides 	the 	term 	of
incarceration.’” State v. Cuttler, 2018 UT App 171, ¶ 17, 436 P.3d
278 (quotation simplified). For this reason, the Utah Supreme
Court has concluded that a trial court lacks jurisdiction to grant
credit for time served during the course of pretrial detention. See
State v. Schreuder, 712 P.2d 264, 277 (Utah 1985). Therefore,
because jurisdiction over the length of an indeterminate sentence
lies exclusively with the Board of Pardons and Parole, the issue
raised by Johnson would be ripe for consideration only if the
Board of Pardons and Parole ultimately decides not to grant
Johnson credit for time served before sentencing.
¶3 	Affirmed.