Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 973.15 (2026)

Sentence, terms, escapes

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

973.15973.15 Sentence, terms, escapes.

973.15(1)(1) Except as provided in s. 973.032, all sentences to the Wisconsin state prisons shall be for one year or more. Except as otherwise provided in this section, all sentences commence at noon on the day of sentence, but time which elapses after sentence while the convicted offender is at large on bail shall not be computed as any part of the term of imprisonment.

973.15(2)(2)

973.15(2)(a)(a) Except as provided in par. (b), the court may impose as many sentences as there are convictions and may provide that any such sentence be concurrent with or consecutive to any other sentence imposed at the same time or previously.

973.15(2)(b)(b) The court may not impose a sentence to the intensive sanctions program consecutive to any other sentence. The court may not impose a sentence to the intensive sanctions program concurrent with a sentence imposing imprisonment, except that the court may impose a sentence to the program concurrent with an imposed and stayed imprisonment sentence or with a prison sentence for which the offender has been released on extended supervision or parole. The court may impose concurrent intensive sanctions program sentences. The court may impose an intensive sanctions program sentence concurrent to probation. The court may impose any sentence for an escape from a sentence to the intensive sanctions program concurrent with the sentence to the intensive sanctions program.

973.15(2m)(2m)

973.15(2m)(a)(a) Definitions. In this subsection:

973.15(2m)(a)1.1. “Determinate sentence” means a bifurcated sentence imposed under s. 973.01 or a life sentence under which a person is eligible for release to extended supervision under s. 973.014 (1g) (a) 1. or 2.

973.15(2m)(a)2.2. “Indeterminate sentence” means a sentence to the Wisconsin state prisons other than one of the following:

973.15(2m)(a)2.a.a. A determinate sentence.

973.15(2m)(a)2.b.b. A sentence under which the person is not eligible for release on parole under s. 939.62 (2m) (c) or 973.014 (1) (c).

973.15(2m)(a)3.3. “Period of confinement in prison,” with respect to any sentence to the Wisconsin state prisons, means any time during which a person is incarcerated under that sentence, including any extensions imposed under s. 302.11 (3), 302.113 (3), or 302.114 (3) and any period of confinement in prison required to be served under s. 302.11 (7) (am), 302.113 (9) (am), or 302.114 (9) (am).

973.15(2m)(b)(b) Determinate sentences imposed to run concurrent with or consecutive to determinate sentences.

973.15(2m)(b)1.1. If a court provides that a determinate sentence is to run concurrent with another determinate sentence, the person sentenced shall serve the periods of confinement in prison under the sentences concurrently and the terms of extended supervision under the sentences concurrently.

973.15(2m)(b)2.2. If a court provides that a determinate sentence is to run consecutive to another determinate sentence, the person sentenced shall serve the periods of confinement in prison under the sentences consecutively and the terms of extended supervision under the sentences consecutively and in the order in which the sentences have been pronounced.

973.15(2m)(c)(c) Determinate sentences imposed to run concurrent with or consecutive to indeterminate sentences.

973.15(2m)(c)1.1. If a court provides that a determinate sentence is to run concurrent with an indeterminate sentence, the person sentenced shall serve the period of confinement in prison under the determinate sentence concurrent with the period of confinement in prison under the indeterminate sentence and the term of extended supervision under the determinate sentence concurrent with the parole portion of the indeterminate sentence.

973.15(2m)(c)2.2. If a court provides that a determinate sentence is to run consecutive to an indeterminate sentence, the person sentenced shall serve the period of confinement in prison under the determinate sentence consecutive to the period of confinement in prison under the indeterminate sentence.

973.15(2m)(d)(d) Indeterminate sentences imposed to run concurrent with or consecutive to determinate sentences.

973.15(2m)(d)1.1. If a court provides that an indeterminate sentence is to run concurrent with a determinate sentence, the person sentenced shall serve the period of confinement in prison under the indeterminate sentence concurrent with the period of confinement in prison under the determinate sentence and the parole portion of the indeterminate sentence concurrent with the term of extended supervision required under the determinate sentence.

973.15(2m)(d)2.2. If a court provides that an indeterminate sentence is to run consecutive to a determinate sentence, the person sentenced shall serve the period of confinement in prison under the indeterminate sentence consecutive to the period of confinement in prison under the determinate sentence.

973.15(2m)(e)(e) Revocation in multiple sentence cases. If a person is serving concurrent determinate sentences and extended supervision is revoked in each case, or if a person is serving a determinate sentence concurrent with an indeterminate sentence and both extended supervision and parole are revoked, the person shall concurrently serve any periods of confinement in prison required under those sentences under s. 302.11 (7) (am), 302.113 (9) (am), or 302.114 (9) (am).

973.15(3)(3) Courts may impose sentences to be served in whole or in part concurrently with a sentence being served or to be served in a federal institution or an institution of another state.

973.15(4)(4) When a court orders a sentence to the Wisconsin state prisons to be served in whole or in part concurrently with a sentence being served or to be served in a federal institution or an institution of another state:

973.15(4)(a)(a) The court shall order the department to immediately inform the appropriate authorities in the jurisdiction where the prior sentence is to be served that the convicted offender is presently available to commence or resume serving that sentence; and

973.15(4)(b)(b) The trial and commitment records required under s. 973.08 shall be delivered immediately to the warden or superintendent of the Wisconsin institution designated as the reception center to receive the convicted offender when he or she becomes available to Wisconsin authorities.

973.15(5)(5) A convicted offender who is made available to another jurisdiction under ch. 976 or in any other lawful manner shall be credited with service of his or her Wisconsin sentence or commitment under the terms of s. 973.155 for the duration of custody in the other jurisdiction.

973.15(6)(6) Sections 302.11 and 304.06 are applicable to an inmate serving a sentence to the Wisconsin state prisons for a crime committed before December 31, 1999, but confined in a federal institution or an institution in another state.

973.15(7)(7) If a convicted offender escapes, the time during which he or she is unlawfully at large after escape shall not be computed as service of the sentence.

973.15(8)(8)

973.15(8)(a)(a) The sentencing court may stay execution of a sentence of imprisonment or to the intensive sanctions program only:

973.15(8)(a)1.1. For legal cause;

973.15(8)(a)2.2. Under s. 973.09 (1) (a); or

973.15(8)(a)3.3. For not more than 60 days, except that the court may not stay execution of a person’s sentence of imprisonment or to the intensive sanctions program under this subdivision if the sentence is for a 3rd or subsequent violation that is counted as a suspension, revocation, or conviction under s. 343.307, or a violation of s. 940.09 (1) or 940.25 in the person’s lifetime, or a combination thereof.

973.15(8)(b)(b) If a court sentences a person under s. 973.03 (5) (b), this subsection applies only to the first period of imprisonment.

973.15 HistoryHistory: 1973 c. 90; 1977 c. 347, 353, 447; 1981 c. 50, 292; 1983 a. 528; 1989 a. 31, 85; 1991 a. 39; 1993 a. 79; 1995 a. 390; 1997 a. 283; 2001 a. 109; 2009 a. 100.

973.15 NoteJudicial Council Note, 1981: Sub. (2) has been simplified to allow a court, in imposing a criminal sentence, to order that it be concurrent with or consecutive to any other sentence imposed at the same time or previously. The prior statute, although lengthier and more complicated, failed to achieve its apparent purpose of allowing consecutive sentencing in situations involving probation and parole revocations, escapes, etc. See Drinkwater v. State, 69 Wis. 2d 60 (1975); Guyton v. State, 69 Wis. 2d 663 (1975); Bruneau v. State, 77 Wis. 2d 166 (1977); Smith v. State, 85 Wis. 2d 650 (1978); and Donaldson v. State, 93 Wis. 2d 306 (1980).

973.15 NoteThis revision allows sentences to be made consecutive to any previously or simultaneously imposed sentence, without regard to whether the offender is “then serving” such sentence, is subject to parole revocation proceedings, or has received a new sentence between the time of an escape and a return to a state facility. The revised statute also governs the sentencing of probationers by virtue of the cross-references in ss. 973.09 (1) (a) and 973.10 (2) (a). [Bill 341-A]

973.15 NoteJudicial Council Note, 1981: Sub. (8) has been added to specify the circumstances under which execution of a sentence of imprisonment may be stayed. Par. (a) references the rule of Reinex v. State, 51 Wis. 152 (1881) and Weston v. State, 28 Wis. 2d 136 (1965), whereby execution can be stayed for “legal cause”, such as during the pendency of an appeal. Par. (b) cross-references the probation statute. Par. (c) is new. It allows the court to delay the commencement of a sentence for up to 60 days. The Wisconsin supreme court recently held that courts have no authority to stay execution of a sentence of imprisonment in the absence of such a statutory provision or legal cause. State v. Braun, 100 Wis. 2d 77 (1981). [Bill 736-A]

973.15 AnnotationUnder subs. (2) and (3), a court may impose a sentence consecutive to an out-of-state sentence. State v. Toy, 125 Wis. 2d 216, 371 N.W.2d 386 (Ct. App. 1985).

973.15 AnnotationA sentencing court has authority to stay a sentence and order it be served consecutive to a ss. 345.47 and 973.07 commitment for failure to pay a fine and penalty assessment. State v. Strohbeen, 147 Wis. 2d 566, 433 N.W.2d 288 (Ct. App. 1988).

973.15 AnnotationAn adult sentence cannot run consecutive to a juvenile disposition. State v. Woods, 173 Wis. 2d 129, 496 N.W.2d 144 (Ct. App. 1992).

973.15 AnnotationThe sentence of a defendant convicted of committing a crime while committed under a prior not guilty by reason of mental incompetence commitment under s. 971.17 may not be served concurrent with the commitment. State v. Szulczewski, 209 Wis. 2d 1, 561 N.W.2d 781 (Ct. App. 1997), 96-1323.

973.15 AnnotationA court may not order a prison sentence consecutive to a s. 971.17 commitment. A sentence can only be imposed concurrent or consecutive to another sentence. State v. Harr, 211 Wis. 2d 584, 568 N.W.2d 307 (Ct. App. 1997), 96-2815.

973.15 AnnotationThe power under sub. (2) to impose consecutive sentences does not grant authority to impose a sentence to be served consecutively to jail time being served as a condition of probation. State v. Maron, 214 Wis. 2d 384, 571 N.W.2d 454 (Ct. App. 1997), 97-0790.

973.15 AnnotationA commitment under s. 971.17 is legal cause under sub. (8) to stay the sentence of a defendant who commits a crime while serving the commitment. Whether to stay the sentence while the commitment is in effect or to begin the sentence immediately is within the sentencing court’s discretion. State v. Szulczewski, 216 Wis. 2d 495, 574 N.W.2d 660 (1998), 96-1323.

973.15 AnnotationSub. (2) authorizes a trial court to impose a sentence consecutive to a previously imposed sentence upon revocation of parole on that sentence. Prior revocation of parole on the earlier sentence is not required before a consecutive sentence may be issued. State v. Cole, 2000 WI App 52, 233 Wis. 2d 577, 608 N.W.2d 432, 98-3336.

973.15 AnnotationThat a sentence begins at noon under sub. (1) was not relevant to a double jeopardy analysis in regard to a sentence pronounced in the morning and then corrected and lengthened the same afternoon before the judgment was entered into the record. State v. Burt, 2000 WI App 126, 237 Wis. 2d 610, 614 N.W.2d 42, 99-1209.

973.15 AnnotationDouble jeopardy prevents a court that, under a mistaken view of the law, entered a valid concurrent sentence from three months later revising the sentence to be a consecutive sentence. State v. Willett, 2000 WI App 212, 238 Wis. 2d 621, 618 N.W.2d 881, 99-2671.

973.15 AnnotationThis section and ss. 302.113 (4) and 973.01 establish that consecutive periods of extended supervision are to be served consecutively, aggregated into one continuous period, so that revocation of extended supervision at any time allows revocation as to all consecutive sentences. State v. Collins, 2008 WI App 163, 314 Wis. 2d 653, 760 N.W.2d 438, 07-2580.

973.15 AnnotationA sentencing court may consider a Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions (COMPAS) risk assessment at sentencing without violating a defendant’s right to due process if the risk assessment is used properly with an awareness of the limitations and cautions set forth in the opinion. Risk scores may not be used: 1) to determine whether an offender is incarcerated; or 2) to determine the severity of the sentence. Additionally, risk scores may not be used as the determinative factor in deciding whether an offender can be supervised safely and effectively in the community. Any Presentence Investigation Report (PSI) containing a COMPAS risk assessment must contain a written advisement listing those limitations and informing sentencing courts of certain cautions set forth in the opinion. State v. Loomis, 2016 WI 68, 371 Wis. 2d 235, 881 N.W.2d 749, 15-0157.

973.15 AnnotationEven if a convicted offender is made available to another jurisdiction, under sub. (5)’s own terms, sentence credit must conform to the terms of s. 973.155. The language of sub. (5) is unambiguous: credit is due under the provision only if it is warranted under s. 973.155, which includes the factual-connection test found in s. 973.155 (1) (a). State v. Lira, 2021 WI 81, 399 Wis. 2d 419, 966 N.W.2d 605, 19-0691.

973.15 AnnotationThe “legal cause” in sub. (8) (a) 1. addresses institutional functions, like a stay pending appeal or a stay to consolidate sentencing matters, or a stay to achieve the objectives of s. 971.17 for a person found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect. Imposing a stay to personally accommodate a defendant is not legal cause. State v. Shirikian, 2023 WI App 13, 406 Wis. 2d 633, 987 N.W.2d 819, 21-0859.

973.15 AnnotationOvercrowding does not constitute legal cause under sub. (8) (a). 76 Atty. Gen. 165.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 105 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1973–2025 · leading case: State v. Cesar Antonio Lira, 2021 WI 81 (Wis. 2021).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Cesar Antonio Lira, 2021 WI 81 (Wis. 2021). · cites it 70× “According to Lira, he was "made available" to Oklahoma and, under Wis. Stat. § 973.15 (5) (2017- 18),2 he is entitled to credit for time served.”

State v. Christopher W. Yakich, 2022 WI 8 (Wis. 2022). · cites it 32× “Wis. Stat. § 973.15 (2). For decades, courts have understood that NGI commitment lengths, by the text of Wis.”

State v. Szulczewski, 574 N.W.2d 660 (Wis. 1998). · cites it 43× “3 The court of appeals concluded that immediate *499 commencement of the defendant's prison sentence was required by Wis. Stat. § 973.15 . 4 II ¶ 8. This case involves the interpretation of Wis.”

Donaldson v. State, 286 N.W.2d 817 (Wis. 1980). · cites it 26× “In Bruneau we concluded that sec. 973.15, Stats., read independently of the statutory provisions involved in Drinkwater and Guyton , provided that a prisoner was serving a sentence only upon entry into prison.”

State v. Zachary S. Friedlander, 923 N.W.2d 849 (Wis. 2019). · cites it 20× “Citing Wis. Stat. § 973.15 (7) (1987-88), the State asserted that the defendant was not entitled to sentence credit for any time the defendant was at large on or after May 1, 1987.”

State v. Maron, 571 N.W.2d 454 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 43× “The court declined to reconsider because of its view that this offense was a separate one and needed to be addressed separately, through a consecutive sentence. Marón contends that under § 973.”

State v. Setagord, 565 N.W.2d 506 (Wis. 1997). · cites it 6× “See also Wis. Stat. § 973.15 (2)(a). [12] Making an attainable parole date the primary gauge of the reasonableness of a sentence disregards traditional sentencing factors.”

State v. Dentici, 2002 WI App 77 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 15× “Thus, under Riske , Wis. Stat. § 973.15 (7) establishes that offenders, who report for sentencing but are turned away due to overcrowding, are in custody and will be granted sentence credit for the time they were at liberty through no fault of their own.”

State v. Martinez, 2007 WI App 225 (Wis. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 42× “§ 973.15 Sentence, terms, escapes. (5) A convicted offender who is made available to another jurisdiction under ch.”

State v. Hall, 2002 WI App 108 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 8× “In the instant case, while the trial court was authorized to impose consecutive sentences pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 973.15 (2)(a), it never explained why it imposed the sentences consecutively such that Hall will never live long enough to serve them.”

State v. Sauceda, 485 N.W.2d 1 (Wis. 1992). · cites it 6× “5 and 6 on pages 504 and 505 cites to several cases which the dissent contends supports the proposition that present law allows for multiple convictions but limits punishment to only one of those convictions.”

State v. Brown, 2006 WI App 41 (Wis. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 17× “*825 Brown claims that pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 973.15 (5) (2003-04), 1 his state sentence should be credited with the time he served on two later federal sentences.”

Show all 105 citing cases →

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(1) — 23 cases

Donaldson v. State, 286 N.W.2d 817 (Wis. 1980). “In Bruneau we concluded that sec. 973.15, Stats., read independently of the statutory provisions involved in Drinkwater and Guyton , provided that a prisoner was serving a sentence only upon entry into prison.”

State v. Cesar Antonio Lira, 2021 WI 81 (Wis. 2021). “According to Lira, he was "made available" to Oklahoma and, under Wis. Stat. § 973.15 (5) (2017- 18),2 he is entitled to credit for time served.”

Bruneau v. State, 252 N.W.2d 347 (Wis. 1977).

Cresci v. State, 278 N.W.2d 850 (Wis. 1979).

State v. Szulczewski, 574 N.W.2d 660 (Wis. 1998). “3 The court of appeals concluded that immediate *499 commencement of the defendant's prison sentence was required by Wis. Stat. § 973.15 . 4 II ¶ 8. This case involves the interpretation of Wis.”

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(2) — 30 cases

State v. Sauceda, 485 N.W.2d 1 (Wis. 1992). “5 and 6 on pages 504 and 505 cites to several cases which the dissent contends supports the proposition that present law allows for multiple convictions but limits punishment to only one of those convictions.”

State v. Maron, 571 N.W.2d 454 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997). “The court declined to reconsider because of its view that this offense was a separate one and needed to be addressed separately, through a consecutive sentence. Marón contends that under § 973.”

State v. Woods, 496 N.W.2d 144 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992).

State v. Johnson, 503 N.W.2d 575 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993).

State v. Hall, 2002 WI App 108 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “In the instant case, while the trial court was authorized to impose consecutive sentences pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 973.15 (2)(a), it never explained why it imposed the sentences consecutively such that Hall will never live long enough to serve them.”

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(2)(a) — 17 cases

State v. Cole, 2000 WI App 52 (Wis. Ct. App. 2000).

State v. Christopher W. Yakich, 2022 WI 8 (Wis. 2022). “Wis. Stat. § 973.15 (2). For decades, courts have understood that NGI commitment lengths, by the text of Wis.”

State v. Lipke, 521 N.W.2d 444 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994).

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(2)(b) — 1 case

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(2m) — 1 case

State Ex Rel. Thomas v. Schwarz, 2007 WI 57 (Wis. 2007).

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(2m)(b) — 3 cases

State v. Collins, 2008 WI App 163 (Wis. Ct. App. 2008).

State v. Alix, 922 N.W.2d 313 (Wis. Ct. App. 2018).

State v. Thomas F. Ball, II (Wis. Ct. App. 2020).

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(2m)(c) — 1 case

State Ex Rel. Thomas v. Schwarz, 2007 WI 57 (Wis. 2007).

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(2m)(c)(2) — 1 case

State Ex Rel. Thomas v. Schwarz, 2007 WI 57 (Wis. 2007).

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(2m)(d) — 1 case

State Ex Rel. Thomas v. Schwarz, 2007 WI 57 (Wis. 2007).

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(2m)(e) — 1 case

Cursey v. Olson (E.D. Wis. 2024).

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(3) — 2 cases

State v. Toy, 371 N.W.2d 386 (Wis. Ct. App. 1985).

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(5) — 4 cases

State v. Martinez, 2007 WI App 225 (Wis. Ct. App. 2007). “§ 973.15 Sentence, terms, escapes. (5) A convicted offender who is made available to another jurisdiction under ch.”

State v. Brown, 2006 WI App 41 (Wis. Ct. App. 2006). “*825 Brown claims that pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 973.15 (5) (2003-04), 1 his state sentence should be credited with the time he served on two later federal sentences.”

State v. Cesar Antonio Lira (Wis. Ct. App. 2020).

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(6) — 1 case

State Ex Rel. Griffin v. Litscher, 2003 WI App 60 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003).

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(7) — 4 cases

State v. Dentici, 2002 WI App 77 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “Thus, under Riske , Wis. Stat. § 973.15 (7) establishes that offenders, who report for sentencing but are turned away due to overcrowding, are in custody and will be granted sentence credit for the time they were at liberty through no fault of their own.”

State v. Riske, 448 N.W.2d 260 (Wis. Ct. App. 1989).

State v. Sugden, 404 N.W.2d 126 (Wis. Ct. App. 1987).

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(8) — 1 case

State Ex Rel. McMillian v. Dickey, 392 N.W.2d 453 (Wis. Ct. App. 1986).

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(8)(a) — 13 cases

Hicks v. Nunnery, 2002 WI App 87 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002).

State v. Szulczewski, 561 N.W.2d 781 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997).

State v. Harr, 568 N.W.2d 307 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997).

State v. Lynne M. Shirikian, 2023 WI App 13 (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).

— Wis. Stat. § 973.15(8)(c) — 1 case

State v. Strohbeen, 433 N.W.2d 288 (Wis. Ct. App. 1988).

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.