Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

Interstate Agreement on Detainers – Inapplicable to SVP Commitment Following Return under IAD to Serve Criminal Sentence

State ex rel Frederick Lee Pharm v. Bartow, 2007 WI 13, affirming 2005 WI App 215
For Pharm: Jon G. Furlow, Nia Enemuch-Trammell,Roisin H. Bell (Pro Bono)

Issue: Whether, following Pharm’s release in another state prison on life-time parole and his return here under the IAD to serve a Wisconsin sentence, he was subject to ch. 980 commitment proceedings on his release from that sentence.

Holding:

¶24      Furthermore, the language of the IAD is clear and unambiguous. The IAD applies to detainers lodged against prisoners that are based on untriedindictments, informations or complaints. … There is nothing in the IAD that indicates that the rights accorded to prisoners under it attach when there are no untried charges outstanding. Therefore, we conclude that under the plain language of the statute, a prisoner has the following rights after he or she files a Request for Disposition under Article III (§ 976.05(3)): (1) transportation to a receiving state to answer pending charges; (2) commencement of a trial within 180 days in the receiving state; (3) return to the sending state to complete the prisoner’s term of incarceration; and (4) upon completion of the prisoner’s term of incarceration in the sending state, return to the receiving state to serve any term of incarceration that has been imposed there.

Nor did the civil commitment invalidate Pharm’s waiver of extradition, ¶¶36-39.

Facebooktwitterlinkedinmail
{ 0 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment