Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027 (2026)
Credit for time spent toward service of a sentence of imprisonment
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 12.55.027. Credit for time spent toward service of a sentence of imprisonment.
(a) A court may grant a defendant credit toward a sentence of imprisonment for time spent in a treatment program that furthers the reformation and rehabilitation of the defendant if the court finds that the program places a substantial restriction on the defendant's freedom of movement and behavior and is consistent with this section.
(b) A court may only grant credit under this section
(1) in the amount of one day of credit toward a sentence of imprisonment for each full day the defendant spent in a treatment program; and
(2) if the court ordered the defendant to participate in and comply with the conditions of the treatment program before the defendant entered the program.
(c) In granting credit toward a sentence of imprisonment for time spent in a treatment program, a court shall consider the following factors:
(1) the restrictions on the defendant's freedom of movement and behavior;
(2) the circumstances under which the defendant was enrolled in the program;
(3) the residency requirements of the program;
(4) the physical custody and supervision of the defendant at the program;
(5) the circumstances under which the defendant is permitted to leave the program's facility;
(6) the rules of the program and the requirement that the defendant obey the orders of persons who have immediate custody or control over the defendant;
(7) the sanctions on the defendant for violating the program's rules or orders;
(8) whether the defendant is subject to arrest for leaving the program's facility without permission;
(9) the use of an electronic monitoring device;
(10) whether the program provides substance abuse treatment;
(11) the use of other technology that monitors or restricts the defendant's movement and behavior;
(12) other factors that support the court's finding that the program places a substantial restriction on the defendant's freedom of movement and behavior;
(13) other factors that support the court's finding that the program furthers the reformation and rehabilitation of the defendant.
(d) A court may grant credit against a sentence of imprisonment for time spent under electronic monitoring if the person has not committed a criminal offense while under electronic monitoring and the court imposes restrictions on the person's freedom of movement and behavior while under the electronic monitoring program, including requiring the person to be confined to a residence except for a
(1) court appearance;
(2) meeting with counsel; or
(3) period during which the person is at a location ordered by the court for the purposes of employment, attending educational or vocational training, performing community volunteer work, or attending a rehabilitative activity or medical appointment.
(e) If a defendant intends to claim credit toward a sentence of imprisonment for time spent in a treatment program or under electronic monitoring either as a condition of probation or as a condition of bail release after a petition to revoke probation has been filed, the defendant shall file notice with the court and the prosecutor 10 days before the disposition hearing. The notice shall include the amount of time the defendant is claiming. The defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the credit claimed meets the requirements of this section. A court may not consider, except for good cause, a request for credit made under this subsection more than 90 days after the disposition hearing.
(f) To qualify as a treatment program under this section, a program must
(1) be intended to address criminogenic traits or behaviors;
(2) provide measures of progress or completion; and
(3) require notification to the prosecuting authority, pretrial services officer, or probation officer if the person is discharged from the program for noncompliance.
(g) Unless the defendant participated in a residential treatment program under (c) and (f) of this section while under electronic monitoring, a court may not grant credit against a sentence of imprisonment under (d) of this section if the sentence is for
(1) a felony crime against a person under AS 11.41;
(2) a crime involving domestic violence as defined in AS 18.66.990;
(3) an offense under AS 11.71 involving the delivery of a controlled substance to a person under 19 years of age;
(4) burglary in the first degree under AS 11.46.300; or
(5) arson in the first degree under AS 11.46.400.
(h) Nothing in this section authorizes the release of a person on electronic monitoring after conviction and while awaiting sentencing if the person is ineligible for release under AS 12.30.040(b).
(i) A court may not grant credit under this section for time spent in a treatment program or under electronic monitoring for a sex offense as defined in AS 12.63.100.
(j) A court may grant credit under this section for time spent in a treatment program or under electronic monitoring if the court finds that the sentence, including credit toward the sentence of imprisonment, meets the requirements of AS 12.55.005.
(k) When a court grants credit toward a sentence of imprisonment under this section, if a defendant spends time in a treatment program while under electronic monitoring, the court may grant credit for either the time spent in the treatment program or for the time spent under electronic monitoring, but not for both.
(l) A court granting credit against a sentence of imprisonment under (a) of this section may grant credit of not more than 365 days against the total term of imprisonment imposed.
(a) A court may grant a defendant credit toward a sentence of imprisonment for time spent in a treatment program that furthers the reformation and rehabilitation of the defendant if the court finds that the program places a substantial restriction on the defendant's freedom of movement and behavior and is consistent with this section.
(b) A court may only grant credit under this section
(1) in the amount of one day of credit toward a sentence of imprisonment for each full day the defendant spent in a treatment program; and
(2) if the court ordered the defendant to participate in and comply with the conditions of the treatment program before the defendant entered the program.
(c) In granting credit toward a sentence of imprisonment for time spent in a treatment program, a court shall consider the following factors:
(1) the restrictions on the defendant's freedom of movement and behavior;
(2) the circumstances under which the defendant was enrolled in the program;
(3) the residency requirements of the program;
(4) the physical custody and supervision of the defendant at the program;
(5) the circumstances under which the defendant is permitted to leave the program's facility;
(6) the rules of the program and the requirement that the defendant obey the orders of persons who have immediate custody or control over the defendant;
(7) the sanctions on the defendant for violating the program's rules or orders;
(8) whether the defendant is subject to arrest for leaving the program's facility without permission;
(9) the use of an electronic monitoring device;
(10) whether the program provides substance abuse treatment;
(11) the use of other technology that monitors or restricts the defendant's movement and behavior;
(12) other factors that support the court's finding that the program places a substantial restriction on the defendant's freedom of movement and behavior;
(13) other factors that support the court's finding that the program furthers the reformation and rehabilitation of the defendant.
(d) A court may grant credit against a sentence of imprisonment for time spent under electronic monitoring if the person has not committed a criminal offense while under electronic monitoring and the court imposes restrictions on the person's freedom of movement and behavior while under the electronic monitoring program, including requiring the person to be confined to a residence except for a
(1) court appearance;
(2) meeting with counsel; or
(3) period during which the person is at a location ordered by the court for the purposes of employment, attending educational or vocational training, performing community volunteer work, or attending a rehabilitative activity or medical appointment.
(e) If a defendant intends to claim credit toward a sentence of imprisonment for time spent in a treatment program or under electronic monitoring either as a condition of probation or as a condition of bail release after a petition to revoke probation has been filed, the defendant shall file notice with the court and the prosecutor 10 days before the disposition hearing. The notice shall include the amount of time the defendant is claiming. The defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the credit claimed meets the requirements of this section. A court may not consider, except for good cause, a request for credit made under this subsection more than 90 days after the disposition hearing.
(f) To qualify as a treatment program under this section, a program must
(1) be intended to address criminogenic traits or behaviors;
(2) provide measures of progress or completion; and
(3) require notification to the prosecuting authority, pretrial services officer, or probation officer if the person is discharged from the program for noncompliance.
(g) Unless the defendant participated in a residential treatment program under (c) and (f) of this section while under electronic monitoring, a court may not grant credit against a sentence of imprisonment under (d) of this section if the sentence is for
(1) a felony crime against a person under AS 11.41;
(2) a crime involving domestic violence as defined in AS 18.66.990;
(3) an offense under AS 11.71 involving the delivery of a controlled substance to a person under 19 years of age;
(4) burglary in the first degree under AS 11.46.300; or
(5) arson in the first degree under AS 11.46.400.
(h) Nothing in this section authorizes the release of a person on electronic monitoring after conviction and while awaiting sentencing if the person is ineligible for release under AS 12.30.040(b).
(i) A court may not grant credit under this section for time spent in a treatment program or under electronic monitoring for a sex offense as defined in AS 12.63.100.
(j) A court may grant credit under this section for time spent in a treatment program or under electronic monitoring if the court finds that the sentence, including credit toward the sentence of imprisonment, meets the requirements of AS 12.55.005.
(k) When a court grants credit toward a sentence of imprisonment under this section, if a defendant spends time in a treatment program while under electronic monitoring, the court may grant credit for either the time spent in the treatment program or for the time spent under electronic monitoring, but not for both.
(l) A court granting credit against a sentence of imprisonment under (a) of this section may grant credit of not more than 365 days against the total term of imprisonment imposed.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2008–2025 · leading case: Medina v. State, 418 P.3d 861 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018).
Medina v. State, 418 P.3d 861 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “That is, we direct the court to evaluate Medina's request under *862 AS 12.55.027, the statute that sets out the criteria governing the award of jail credit for time spent in treatment.”
State v. Thompson, 425 P.3d 166 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “*167 In 2015, the Alaska Legislature amended AS 12.55.027(d) to give trial courts the authority to grant credit against a sentence of imprisonment for time that the defendant spent on electronic monitoring as a condition of bail release, provided that certain statutory…”
State v. Bell, 421 P.3d 128 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “*130 In 2015, the Alaska legislature amended AS 12.55.027(d) to give trial courts the authority to grant credit against a sentence of imprisonment for time that the defendant spent on electronic monitoring as a condition of bail release, provided that certain statutory…”
State v. Grady, 831 S.E.2d 542 (N.C. 2019). “Code § 15 -20A-20 (LexisNexis 2018); Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027 (d), (g)(3) (2018); Ariz.”
Belknap v. State, 426 P.3d 1156 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “1 A few months after his sentence was imposed, Belknap filed a pro se motion under AS 12.55.027(d) requesting sentencing credit for the time he spent on bail release under conditions that included court-ordered electronic monitoring.”
Tanner v. State, 436 P.3d 1061 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “–2– 2628 The statute that governed Tanner’s credit for electronic monitoring, AS 12.55.027(d), stated that a defendant could receive this credit only if “the court imposes restrictions on the [defendant’s] freedom of movement and behavior while under the electronic monitoring…”
McKinley v. State, 275 P.3d 567 (Alaska Ct. App. 2012). “Then, in 2007, the legislature enacted a new statute, AS 12.55.027, that defines the situations in which defendants are entitled to credit against their sentences for time spent in these non-prison residential settings.”
State v. Howard, 357 P.3d 1207 (Alaska Ct. App. 2015). “Howard further argued that he was entitled to "Nygren" credit under AS 12.55.027 for the 82 days that he spent in residential treatment at the Phillips Ayagnirvik Treatment Center.”
Wright v. State, 347 P.3d 1000 (Alaska Ct. App. 2015). “48 We held that the legislature's purpose in enacting AS 12.55.027 was to clarify pre-existing law and to confirm that jail-time eredit would not be given for time served on electronic monitoring; the statute did not create new law.”
Shelby Tarbox v. State of Alaska (Alaska Ct. App. 2025). “–3– 2815 Prior to sentencing, Tarbox filed an unopposed motion for sentencing credit under AS 12.55.027. Tarbox noted that AS 12.55.”
State v. Shetters, 246 P.3d 338 (Alaska Ct. App. 2010). “(As an ancillary argument, the State suggests that if credit for time served is granted to parolees who are ordered to reside in a non-prison correctional center by the Parole Board, this might conceivably conflict with the rules codified in AS 12.55.027 governing credit for…”
Elizabeth Watson v. State of Alaska, 487 P.3d 568 (Alaska 2021). “33 If the individual interest is important, there must be a “close relationship” between the classification and an important State interest.”
— Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027(a) — 1 case
Marvin Joe Kelila v. State of Alaska (Alaska Ct. App. 2024).
— Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027(b) — 1 case
Shelby Tarbox v. State of Alaska (Alaska Ct. App. 2025). “–3– 2815 Prior to sentencing, Tarbox filed an unopposed motion for sentencing credit under AS 12.55.027. Tarbox noted that AS 12.55.”
— Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027(b)(3)(A) — 1 case
Gates v. State, 178 P.3d 1173 (Alaska Ct. App. 2008).
— Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027(c) — 3 cases
McKinley v. State, 275 P.3d 567 (Alaska Ct. App. 2012). “Then, in 2007, the legislature enacted a new statute, AS 12.55.027, that defines the situations in which defendants are entitled to credit against their sentences for time spent in these non-prison residential settings.”
State v. Howard, 357 P.3d 1207 (Alaska Ct. App. 2015). “Howard further argued that he was entitled to "Nygren" credit under AS 12.55.027 for the 82 days that he spent in residential treatment at the Phillips Ayagnirvik Treatment Center.”
Shelby Tarbox v. State of Alaska (Alaska Ct. App. 2025). “–3– 2815 Prior to sentencing, Tarbox filed an unopposed motion for sentencing credit under AS 12.55.027. Tarbox noted that AS 12.55.”
— Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027(c)(2) — 1 case
McKinley v. State, 275 P.3d 567 (Alaska Ct. App. 2012). “Then, in 2007, the legislature enacted a new statute, AS 12.55.027, that defines the situations in which defendants are entitled to credit against their sentences for time spent in these non-prison residential settings.”
— Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027(d) — 9 cases
State v. Thompson, 425 P.3d 166 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “*167 In 2015, the Alaska Legislature amended AS 12.55.027(d) to give trial courts the authority to grant credit against a sentence of imprisonment for time that the defendant spent on electronic monitoring as a condition of bail release, provided that certain statutory…”
State v. Bell, 421 P.3d 128 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “*130 In 2015, the Alaska legislature amended AS 12.55.027(d) to give trial courts the authority to grant credit against a sentence of imprisonment for time that the defendant spent on electronic monitoring as a condition of bail release, provided that certain statutory…”
Belknap v. State, 426 P.3d 1156 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “1 A few months after his sentence was imposed, Belknap filed a pro se motion under AS 12.55.027(d) requesting sentencing credit for the time he spent on bail release under conditions that included court-ordered electronic monitoring.”
Tanner v. State, 436 P.3d 1061 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “–2– 2628 The statute that governed Tanner’s credit for electronic monitoring, AS 12.55.027(d), stated that a defendant could receive this credit only if “the court imposes restrictions on the [defendant’s] freedom of movement and behavior while under the electronic monitoring…”
Wright v. State, 347 P.3d 1000 (Alaska Ct. App. 2015). “48 We held that the legislature's purpose in enacting AS 12.55.027 was to clarify pre-existing law and to confirm that jail-time eredit would not be given for time served on electronic monitoring; the statute did not create new law.”
— Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027(d)(1) — 1 case
Don L. Baker v. State of Alaska, 538 P.3d 1023 (Alaska Ct. App. 2023).
— Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027(d)(3) — 1 case
Don L. Baker v. State of Alaska, 538 P.3d 1023 (Alaska Ct. App. 2023).
— Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027(e) — 5 cases
Medina v. State, 418 P.3d 861 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “That is, we direct the court to evaluate Medina's request under *862 AS 12.55.027, the statute that sets out the criteria governing the award of jail credit for time spent in treatment.”
State v. Bell, 421 P.3d 128 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “*130 In 2015, the Alaska legislature amended AS 12.55.027(d) to give trial courts the authority to grant credit against a sentence of imprisonment for time that the defendant spent on electronic monitoring as a condition of bail release, provided that certain statutory…”
State v. Thompson, 425 P.3d 166 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “*167 In 2015, the Alaska Legislature amended AS 12.55.027(d) to give trial courts the authority to grant credit against a sentence of imprisonment for time that the defendant spent on electronic monitoring as a condition of bail release, provided that certain statutory…”
Belknap v. State, 426 P.3d 1156 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018). “1 A few months after his sentence was imposed, Belknap filed a pro se motion under AS 12.55.027(d) requesting sentencing credit for the time he spent on bail release under conditions that included court-ordered electronic monitoring.”
Medina v. State (Alaska Ct. App. 2018).
— Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027(f) — 1 case
Shelby Tarbox v. State of Alaska (Alaska Ct. App. 2025). “–3– 2815 Prior to sentencing, Tarbox filed an unopposed motion for sentencing credit under AS 12.55.027. Tarbox noted that AS 12.55.”
— Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027(g) — 2 cases
Shelby Tarbox v. State of Alaska (Alaska Ct. App. 2025). “–3– 2815 Prior to sentencing, Tarbox filed an unopposed motion for sentencing credit under AS 12.55.027. Tarbox noted that AS 12.55.”
Marvin Joe Kelila v. State of Alaska (Alaska Ct. App. 2024).
— Alaska Stat. § 12.55.027(g)(1) — 1 case
Shelby Tarbox v. State of Alaska (Alaska Ct. App. 2025). “–3– 2815 Prior to sentencing, Tarbox filed an unopposed motion for sentencing credit under AS 12.55.027. Tarbox noted that AS 12.55.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.