With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". of release amount to “home detention” under RCW 9.94A.030, the defendant is entitled to receive credit against his sentence for the time spent on home detention pending appeal. State v. Anderson, 132 Wn.2d 203, 212-13, 937 P.2d 581 (1997). ¶8 The right to receive credit for time spent on postconviction electronic home detention is not statutory. Although Washington’s Sentencing Reform Act of 1981 (SRA), chapter 9.94A RCW, mandates that defendants receive credit against their sentence for time served under pretrial electronic home detention, it does not mandate credit for posttrial electronic home detention. See RCW 9.94A.505(6) (granting defendants credit for “all confinement time served before the sentencing”); see also State v. Speaks, 119 Wn.2d 204, 208-09, 829 P.2d 1096 (1992) (<HOLDING>). However, in Anderson, this court held that

A: holding as a matter of law pretrial electronic monitoring and home confinement merits sentencing credit under its statute
B: holding confinement to home and work through electronic supervision does not equate to custody
C: holding that electronic home monitoring constitutes confinement under the sra
D: holding electronic home monitoring is not time spent in custody because there is a difference in restrictions between electronic home monitoring and jail
C.