NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

OPINION

THOMPSON, Judge.

Wesley A. Anglin appeals from the September 13, 2012, order of the Breckinridge Circuit Court denying Anglin's motion to reduce his sentence by means of a sentencing credit adjustment. Because we find no error with the trial court's judgment, we affirm.

In 2009, Anglin was on probation from a sentence in Hardin County Case No. 07-CR-00157. Anglin was arrested in Breckinridge County on March 27, 2009, and incarcerated from March 27, 2009, through May 26, 2009. On May 26, 2009, Anglin's probation was revoked, as a result of the March 27, 2009, arrest, and his Hardin County sentence was reinstated. Anglin was given jail credit on his Hardin County sentence for the time spent incarcerated from March 27, 2009 through May 26, 2009, and remained incarcerated under the terms of that sentence. On May 25, 2011, while still incarcerated under his Hardin County sentence, Anglin was sentenced in the underlying Breckinridge County case.

On August 17, 2012, after exhausting his administrative remedies, Anglin filed a motion to reduce his Breckinridge County sentence with the 792 days he spent incarcerated before receiving that sentence. Anglin argues that he should receive credit from the date of his March 27, 2009, arrest until his May 25, 2011, sentencing date. In a September 13, 2013, order denying Anglin's motion, the trial court made the following relevant findings:

This appeal followed.

Anglin first argues that the trial court denied his motion "without any formal reason or explanation." This argument is clearly refuted by the order. The trial court's order states Anglin previously received credit for his March 27, 2009, through May 25, 2011, incarceration on his Hardin County sentence, and he could not receive credit on two consecutive sentences for the same time served. Accordingly, Anglin's argument is without merit.

Anglin next argues that his case is analogous to the unpublished case of Collins v. Commonwealth, 2006-CA-000685-MR, 2007 WL 866651 (Ky.App. Mar. 23, 2007). We disagree. The facts of Collins are distinguishable from those currently before us. Collins was arrested, posted bond, and shortly thereafter, arrested again. Collins remained incarcerated while awaiting sentencing on the charges stemming from both arrests. The Court held that Collins's time served while awaiting sentencing "should be credited to both [charges] regardless of whether the sentences were to run concurrent or consecutive, as Collins was in jail awaiting trial on both indictments in the two separate counties for that period." Id. at 3. Here, Anglin was serving a sentence on one charge while awaiting sentencing on another charge. Accordingly, Collins is inapplicable.

Anglin's final argument is that Kentucky Revised Sentences (KRS) 532.120 supports his argument. KRS 532.120 governs the calculation of terms of imprisonment and an inmate's right to challenge the Department of Corrections. However, Anglin makes only a general argument of error and has failed to cite to any portion of KRS 532.120 by which the trial court failed to abide. Accordingly, his argument is without merit.

For the foregoing reasons, the September 13, 2012, order of the Breckinridge Circuit Court is affirmed.

ALL CONCUR.