The appellant pleaded guilty to robbery with a firearm and challenged the refusal to credit approximately four months of pre-sentencing custody against the four-year mandatory minimum sentence.
The Supreme Court held that, consistent with the overall sentencing regime, a sentencing judge may give credit for time served in pre-sentencing custody even where that credit reduces the pronounced sentence below the mandatory minimum.
Applying the reasoning in the companion decision in Wust, the Court found the sentencing judge erred in declining to consider such credit.
The appeal was allowed and the matter was remitted to the sentencing judge to determine the appropriate amount of credit.
