Holding in People v. Buckhalter (2001) 26 Cal.4th 20, that a prisoner serving a state prison sentence and who obtains a remand for resentence is entitled to conduct credit calculated at the postsentence rather than presentence rate, the Supreme Court expressly reserved the question of how the credit would be calculated when the underlying conviction was reversed. The Court now holds that the rule is the same when the conviction is reversed. Presentence custody is more than a mere label for time served before a sentence is imposed. Persons who are held pretrial are presumptively innocent and not in need of rehabilitation, as opposed to those who have been found guilty. They have different types of rehabilitation programs that those who have been sentenced. Also, awarding conduct credit at the presentence rate after reversal would create unequal treatment of those who are retried from those who whose convictions are affirmed. [Note: in this case, the first case was tried. After the conviction was reversed, the case was resolved by a negotiated disposition. Appellant did get some 4019 credit. But, the Supreme Court held that her plea of guilt meant that the defendant could not now complain that she was entitled to the benefit of Penal Code section 2900.1, which provides for receipt of proper credit when an incorrect initial judgment is corrected, because her guilty plea conceded the legal basis for her original conviction.] Dissent by J. Kennard.