Mo. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 558
Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 558.031 (2026)

Calculation of terms of imprisonment

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  558.031.  Calculation of terms of imprisonment — jail time credit calculation, requirements. — 1.  A sentence of imprisonment shall commence when a person convicted of an offense in this state is received into the custody of the department of corrections or other place of confinement where the offender is sentenced.

  2.  When placing a person on probation for a suspended imposition of sentence, probation for a suspended execution of sentence, or when executing a sentence of imprisonment, the court shall record, as part of each judgment, the number of days the person was in prison, jail, or custody, that was related to the offense, after the offense occurred and before being sentenced to imprisonment and the defendant shall be awarded credit toward the service of a sentence of imprisonment for that number of days .  The jail time credit calculation shall be based upon the certification of the sheriff as provided in subdivision (3) of subsection 2 of section 217.305 and may be supplemented by a certificate of a sheriff or other custodial officer from another jurisdiction having held the person on the charge of the offense for which the sentence of imprisonment is ordered and shall be pronounced at the time of the judgment, the execution of a suspended sentence, or the suspension of imposition of sentence, shall be included in the record, and shall include both the dates the person was in custody and the number of days to be credited toward the service of the sentence.

  3.  For purposes of this section, time in custody related to an offense includes time during which the offense was charged in a criminal proceeding, there was an arrest warrant issued in said criminal proceeding, and the arrest warrant was served upon the person, and includes time served on house arrest.  The person shall not be entitled to any credit toward the service of a sentence of imprisonment for any time such person was not being held on said arrest warrant because such person posted bond, the arrest warrant was recalled, or the person was otherwise released.

  4.  The court may take judicial notice of all time the person has served in prison, jail, or custody, or on house arrest for a criminal proceeding by comparing dates of service on arrest warrants with evidence contained within the court file of dates of release and the prosecution and defense attorney may enter into a stipulation with regard to credit for the service of a sentence of imprisonment for all time in prison, jail, or custody, or on house arrest except in no event may the court approve a stipulation that is greater than or less than the time in custody related to an offense.

  5.  Upon motion and notice by defendant or defense counsel, for any such person who was held in a juvenile detention facility for an offense for which such person was subsequently adjudicated to stand trial as an adult, the court may also award credit toward the service of a sentence of imprisonment for any time such person was confined in a juvenile detention facility.

  6.  In the event a criminal proceeding related to an offense is dismissed without prejudice by a court or nolle prossed by the state, upon motion and notice by defendant or defense counsel, the proceeding may be consolidated into the present matter for purposes of calculating credit for the service of a sentence of imprisonment.

  7.  The officer required by law to deliver a person convicted of an offense in this state to the department of corrections shall endorse upon the papers required by section 217.305 both the dates the offender was in custody and the period of time to be credited toward the service of the sentence of imprisonment, included in the judgment or suspended imposition of sentence and such additional days after the pronouncement of sentence and before the delivery of the person to the department of corrections.

  8.  If a person convicted of an offense escapes from custody, such escape shall interrupt the sentence.  The interruption shall continue until such person is returned to the correctional center where the sentence was being served, or in the case of a person committed to the custody of the department of corrections, to any correctional center operated by the department of corrections.  An escape shall also interrupt the jail time credit to be applied to a sentence which had not commenced when the escape occurred.

  9.  If a sentence of imprisonment is vacated and a new sentence imposed upon the offender for that offense, all time served under the vacated sentence shall be credited against the new sentence, unless the time has already been credited to another sentence as provided in subsection 1 of this section.

  10.  If a person released from imprisonment on parole or serving a conditional release term violates any of the conditions of his or her parole or release, he or she may be treated as a parole violator.  If the parole board revokes the parole or conditional release, the paroled person shall serve the remainder of the prison term and conditional release term, as an additional prison term, and the conditionally released person shall serve the remainder of the conditional release term as a prison term, unless released on parole.

  11.  A person may only challenge credit awarded or not awarded pursuant to this section by the filing of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

­­--------

(L. 1977 S.B. 60, A.L. 1990 H.B. 974, A.L. 1995 H.B. 424, A.L. 2014 S.B. 491, A.L. 2021 S.B. 26 merged with S.B. 53 & 60, A.L. 2023 S.B. 186, A.L. 2026 S.B. 888, A.L. 2026  H.B. 2637 & 3155)

Effective 01-01-28, see § 1.901

Revisor’s note: This section was amended by both S.B. 888 and H.B. 2637 & 3155, 2026. H.B. 2637 & 3155 repealed the version amended by S.B. 888 effective 8-28-26 and amended this section effective 1-01-28.

Severability clause, see § 1.1005

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 98 cases (14 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: State Ex Rel. Nixon v. Kelly, 58 S.W.3d 513 (Mo. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State Ex Rel. Nixon v. Kelly, 58 S.W.3d 513 (Mo. 2001). · cites it 40× “Respondent agreed, citing section 558.031, RSMo Supp.1995, which provides the time a prisoner serves will be credited to more than one offense if the time in custody is “related to” both offenses.”
Webster v. Purkett, 110 S.W.3d 832 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 21× “Petitioner, Terry Webster, filed a petition for declaratory judgment or in the alternative writ of habeas corpus after the Department of Corrections recalculated his entitlement to jail-time-credit under section 558.031 RSMo.1986. Petitioner appeals from the trial court’s grant…”
Donaldson v. Crawford, 230 S.W.3d 340 (Mo. 2007). · cites it 15× “The trial court correctly determined that sections 558.031 and 559.100 2 provide that the sentencing court, not the department of corrections, determines whether credit should be given when probation is revoked.”
Prapotnik v. Crowe, 55 S.W.3d 914 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 22× “Point I Crowe argues, in her sole point on appeal, that the trial court erred in granting Prapotnik’s declaratory judgment petition because the 1995 amendment to § 558.031, which would grant him jail time credit pursuant to Goings v.”
Dunn v. Precythe, 557 S.W.3d 454 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 18× “Dunn argues that the trial court erred in dismissing his claim because not all of his claims were adjudicated, he pled sufficient facts, and the trial court misinterpreted section 558.031. 2 We affirm. Statement of Facts 3 Mr.”
Howard v. Missouri Dep't of Corr., 341 S.W.3d 857 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 30× “Here, Section 558.031 is the applicable statute that Howard contends entitles him to credit for time served in Canada pursuant to the Missouri detainer.”
Roy v. Missouri Dep't of Corr., 23 S.W.3d 738 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 18× “Roy claims that the trial court clearly erred in dismissing his petition because (1) a prisoner may file a petition for declaratory judgment seeking a determination that he or she is entitled to credit toward the completion of a sentence pursuant to § 558.031, RSMo 1994; 1 (2)…”
State v. Moore, 303 S.W.3d 515 (Mo. 2010). · cites it 6× “He argues that under section 558.031 a sentence to the department of corrections does not commence until a person physically is received by the department and, therefore, he was not serving a sentence when he was booked into the county jail because physically he had not been…”
Mudloff v. Missouri Dep't of Corr., 53 S.W.3d 145 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 22× “At that time, Section 558.031, RSMo Cum.Supp.1997 stated, in relevant part: 1.”
Goings v. Missouri Dep't of Corr., 6 S.W.3d 906 (Mo. 1999). · cites it 10× “1 The department of corrections refused to give Goings credit for time served, pursuant to section 558.031, 2 against the five-year sentence imposed in December 1997 in the circuit court for Stoddard County.”
Belton v. Moore, 112 S.W.3d 1 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 13× “Belton reasoned that he was entitled to such credit under section 558.031 3 because all of the time served between those dates was related to his second offense for drug manufacturing.”
State Ex Rel. Gater v. Burgess, 128 S.W.3d 907 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 22× “Gater filed this writ of habeas corpus in our court, claiming that section 558.031 3 compels respondent to credit his current trafficking sentence with the sixteen months he spent in jail after his parole was revoked.”
Show all 98 citing cases →
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 558.031(1): 1 case
Mudloff v. Missouri Dep't of Corr., 53 S.W.3d 145 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001). “At that time, Section 558.031, RSMo Cum.Supp.1997 stated, in relevant part: 1.”
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 558.031(2): 1 case
Collar v. Missouri Dep't of Corr., 314 S.W.3d 386 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 558.031(3): 1 case
Michael Jerome ISREAL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Charles D. MARSHALL, Warden, Respondent-Appellee, 125 F.3d 837 (9th Cir. 1997).
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.