Sex offender is not entitled to retroactive benefit of October 1, 2011 increase in presentence custody credits. Defendant, who committed his offense prior to October 1, 2011, sought the benefits of increased presentence custody credits based on revisions to Penal Code section 4019. Held: Denied. Preliminarily, the court found that section 1237.1 was not a procedural bar because appellant did not contend the trial court erred in calculating credits under the version of section 4019 in effect at his August 2011 sentencing. On the merits, the court found appellant not entitled to the enhanced credits based on equal protection, although it found he is similarly situated with persons whose offenses were committed on or after October 1, 2011. It is within the Legislature’s discretion to set the operative date of a statute and the exercise of that discretion is subject to rational basis review. The Legislature may have decided that the nature and scope of the fiscal emergency, which prompted the amendment, when balanced against public safety concerns, required granting more beneficial credits only after October 1, 2011. The Legislature also had a right to “control the risk of [the] new legislation by limiting its application,” and to preserve the deterrent effect of previous versions of the statute as to crimes committed before its effective date.