With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Had Adcock not been transferred to stand trial as an adult, he clearly would not be entitled to credit for the time spent in the youth detention facility. The Alabama Supreme Court, in S.F.R. v. State, 598 So.2d 1003 (Ala.Cr.App.1991), held that a juvenile who had been adjudicated delinquent on charges of first-degree assault was not entitled to credit for time served in a youth detention facility pending his adjudication. S.F.R. held that § 15-18-5, Ala.Code 1975, was applicable to “adults only.” 598 So.2d at 1005. (Emphasis original.) Other jurisdictions have held that statutes similar to § 15-18-5 allow juveniles who are tried as adults to be credited for time spent in a youth detention facility while awaiting trial. See, State v. James, 106 Ohio App.3d 686, 666 N.E.2d 1185 (1995) (<HOLDING>); People v. Thomas, 58 Mich.App. 9, 226 N.W.2d

A: holding that where there were two possible grounds to revoke defendants probation and only one ground was relied on to revoke his probation defendant was not entitled to jailtime credit when he was later convicted on the offense that constituted the other ground it did not matter that the authorities learned about the ground for revocation while investigating the offense for which he was convicted sjection 558031 requires only that custody be related to the offense on which credit is sought because his custody was not related to the convicted offense he did not get any credit
B: holding that a juvenile convicted as an adult was entitled to credit for pretrial detention in a youth facility where the applicable statute required authorities to reduce a prisoners sentence by the total number of days the prisoner was confined for any reason
C: holding that juvenile pretrial detention implicates due process rights
D: holding the rule was not applicable in a pretrial venue hearing
B.