Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 18-309 (2026)
Computation of term of imprisonment.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Computation of term of imprisonment.
(1) In computing the term of imprisonment, the person against whom the judgment was entered shall receive credit in the judgment for any period of incarceration prior to entry of judgment, if such incarceration was for the offense or an included offense for which the judgment was entered. The remainder of the term commences upon the pronouncement of sentence and if thereafter, during such term, the defendant by any legal means is temporarily released from such imprisonment and subsequently returned thereto, the time during which he was at large must not be computed as part of such term.
(2) In computing the term of imprisonment when judgment has been withheld and is later entered or sentence has been suspended and is later imposed, the person against whom the judgment is entered or imposed shall receive credit in the judgment for any period of incarceration served as a condition of probation under the original withheld or suspended judgment.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 143
cases (19 in the last 5 years), 1957–2026 · leading case: State v. Dameniel Preston Owens, 343 P.3d 30 (Idaho 2015).
State v. Dameniel Preston Owens, 343 P.3d 30 (Idaho 2015). “The remainder of the term commences upon the pronouncement of sentence and if thereafter, during such term, the defendant by any legal means is temporarily released from such imprisonment and subsequently returned thereto, the time during which he was at large must not be…”
State v. Brand & Nall, 395 P.3d 809 (Idaho 2017). “” I.C. § 18-309 (emphasis added). The statute continues to provide that a defendant gets the credit only on a requirement that incarceration was for “the offense or an included offense for which the judgment was entered.”
State v. Jason Roy Barrett, 414 P.3d 1188 (Idaho 2018). “Turning to the issue of credit for time served, this appeal centers on whether the Hold Notice Request provided a basis for Barrett’s incarceration such that he was entitled to credit under Idaho Code section 18-309. The statute reads in relevant part as follows: In computing…”
State v. Burke, 462 P.3d 599 (Idaho 2020). “I.C. § 18-309. Unlike time served in jail awaiting trial, the time which a defendant, such as Burke, spends in the custody of IDHW for diagnostic and treatment purposes is not incarceration for an offense for which a judgment had been (or could be) entered.”
State v. Corey D. Young & Marco A. Rios-Lopez, 406 P.3d 868 (Idaho 2017). “Appellants are correct that Rule 35(e) states: “A motion to correct a court’s computation of credit for time served, granted pursuant to Idaho Code § 18-309 or 19-2603, may be made at any time.”
State v. Gonzalez, 439 P.3d 1267 (Idaho 2019). “The first prong requires incarceration of the defendant from the date an arrest warrant is served and the judgment of conviction being entered. Id. at 192-93, 395 P.3d at 812-13.”
State v. Clements, 218 P.3d 1143 (Idaho 2009). “He asserts that the sentence is illegal because it does not comply with I.C. § 18-309. The language of I.C. § 18-309 is mandatory, and requires that in sentencing a criminal defendant, the sentencing judge give the appropriate credit for pre-judgment incarceration.”
State v. Climer, 896 P.2d 346 (Idaho Ct. App. 1995). “Idaho Code § 18-309 provides as follows: In computing the term of imprisonment, the person against whom the judgment was entered, shall receive credit for any period of incarceration prior to entry of judgment, if such incarceration was for the offense or an included offense for…”
State v. Brown, 422 P.3d 1147 (Idaho Ct. App. 2018). “Initially, the parties stipulated Brown was entitled to a total of ninety-nine days of credit; however, following a hearing on the motion, the district court denied Brown's request for additional credit for time served and entered an order withdrawing the credit previously…”
State v. Lance Tyrell Taylor, 373 P.3d 699 (Idaho 2016). “” In this case, the district court pronounced Taylor’s sentence on March 26, 2013. That is when he began serving his sentence.”
State v. Hoch, 630 P.2d 143 (Idaho 1981). “Hoch filed a motion for correction of sentence asserting that I.C. § 18-309 requires that he be given 383 days credit on each of the five year sentences, i.”
State v. Albert Ray Moore, 319 P.3d 501 (Idaho Ct. App. 2014). “The awarding of credit for time served is governed by I.C. § 18-309. 7 The language of I.C. § 18-309 is mandatory and requires that, in sentencing a criminal defen *21 dant or (as in this case) when hearing an I.”
— Idaho Code § 18-309(1) — 21 cases
State v. Gonzalez, 439 P.3d 1267 (Idaho 2019). “The first prong requires incarceration of the defendant from the date an arrest warrant is served and the judgment of conviction being entered. Id. at 192-93, 395 P.3d at 812-13.”
State v. Jason Roy Barrett, 414 P.3d 1188 (Idaho 2018). “Turning to the issue of credit for time served, this appeal centers on whether the Hold Notice Request provided a basis for Barrett’s incarceration such that he was entitled to credit under Idaho Code section 18-309. The statute reads in relevant part as follows: In computing…”
State v. Brand & Nall, 395 P.3d 809 (Idaho 2017). “” I.C. § 18-309 (emphasis added). The statute continues to provide that a defendant gets the credit only on a requirement that incarceration was for “the offense or an included offense for which the judgment was entered.”
State v. Burke, 462 P.3d 599 (Idaho 2020). “I.C. § 18-309. Unlike time served in jail awaiting trial, the time which a defendant, such as Burke, spends in the custody of IDHW for diagnostic and treatment purposes is not incarceration for an offense for which a judgment had been (or could be) entered.”
State v. Corey D. Young & Marco A. Rios-Lopez, 406 P.3d 868 (Idaho 2017). “Appellants are correct that Rule 35(e) states: “A motion to correct a court’s computation of credit for time served, granted pursuant to Idaho Code § 18-309 or 19-2603, may be made at any time.”
— Idaho Code § 18-309(2) — 4 cases
State v. Daniel William Leary, 372 P.3d 404 (Idaho 2016).
State v. Solano, 464 P.3d 310 (Idaho Ct. App. 2020).
State v. Bujak, 551 P.3d 771 (Idaho 2024).
State v. Andres Alvarez (Idaho Ct. App. 2016).
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.