Crone, J.
Reynaldo Ernesto Alvarez pled guilty to level 6 felony sexual battery and was subsequently sentenced to two and a half years in the Indiana Department of Correction. Alvarez filed a motion to correct error arguing that the trial court erred during sentencing in declining to give him credit for time spent in the Hamilton County Jail prior to the entry of his conviction and sentencing hearing. The trial court denied the motion. Alvarez now appeals asserting that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion. Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm.
…
Alvarez claims that the trial court improperly declined to give him credit for the time he spent in the Hamilton County Jail after he was transported back to Indiana by federal authorities pursuant to the writ of habeas corpus prosequendum. See Ind. Code § 35-33-10-5 (outlining procedure for securing attendance, for purposes of state criminal prosecution, of defendants confined in federal institutions). We find our supreme court’s decision in Sweeney v. State, 704 N.E.2d 86, 109 (Ind. 1998), cert. denied (1999), instructive on this issue. In Sweeney, the defendant was serving a federal sentence when he was brought back to Indiana to face pending criminal charges. Following his conviction in Indiana, he argued that the trial court erred in denying him credit time for his pretrial detention in the Clark County Jail awaiting trial. However, as in this case, the defendant in Sweeney was being detained at the behest of federal authorities when he was brought back to Indiana to face pending. criminal charges. The trial court determined that because the defendant was incarcerated for other reasons by federal authorities, he was not entitled to credit for the time served in Indiana against his Indiana sentence. Our supreme court affirmed that decision, noting that there are two criteria to consider in determining whether a defendant has a right to pretrial credit time: (1) pretrial confinement (2) which was a result of the criminal charge for which sentence is now imposed. Id. (citing Cohen v. State, 560 N.E.2d 1246, 1249 (Ind. 1990)). Because the defendant in Sweeney was incarcerated as a result of a federal conviction and not due to the charges filed by the State of Indiana, the court determined that the defendant was properly denied pretrial credit time. Id.
…
…Alvarez’s pretrial confinement in the Hamilton County Jail was not a result of the criminal charges for which the trial court here was imposing sentence. In other words, Alvarez was not subject to pretrial/presentence confinement based upon the Indiana charges for which he had already posted bond and been released. Rather, Alvarez was in custody with the permission and on behalf of the federal authorities who transported him to Indiana to face the current charges. Accordingly, Alverez was not entitled to credit for the time served after he was returned to Indiana awaiting conviction and sentencing. We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Alvarez’s motion to correct error.
Affirmed.
May, J., and Pyle, J., concur.