Skip to content
Name: In re Jose R.
Case #: B326712
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 7
Opinion Date: 06/12/2024
Summary

The juvenile court did not err in applying pre-disposition custody credits to the maximum term of confinement. The minor was committed to a secure youth treatment facility after he admitted committing an assault with a deadly weapon. On appeal he argued the court erred in applying his precommitment custody credits to his maximum term of confinement instead of his baseline term. However, Welfare and Institutions Code, section 875, subdivision (c)(1)(C), clearly provides, “Precommitment credits for time served must be applied against the maximum term of confinement as set pursuant to this subdivision.”

The application of precommitment custody credits to the maximum term of confinement under section 875, subdivision (c)(1)(C), does not violate equal protection. The credit provisions of section 875 involve neither a suspect class nor a fundamental right. They meet equal protection standards and survive a rational basis review. Further, the series of bills passed in 2020 and 2022, aimed at “juvenile justice realignment,” was within the Legislature’s power to make changes to sentencing statutes that may create disparities between how individuals are sentenced before and after the amendments.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B326712.PDF