Skip to content
Name: People v. Garcia
Case #: B233562
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 09/20/2012

Appellant was not entitled to the more favorable credits under the various amendments to Penal Code sections 4019 and 2933 because he was convicted of a serious felony, had a prior serious felony, and was sentenced before the realignment changes to section 4019 became effective. Appellant was convicted of making a criminal threat (Pen. Code, § 422). A prior serious felony was found true within the meaning of Penal Code section 667, subdivision (a)(1). The offense occurred on May 28, 2010 and appellant was sentenced on January 26, 2011. At sentencing appellant received presentence credits equaling two days of conduct…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Lara
Case #: S192784
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 07/19/2012

A court's authority to strike a prior conviction pursuant to Penal Code section 1385 does not include the discretionary power to ignore the prior convictions which disqualify the prisoner from earning credits at a more favorable rate. Effective January 25, 2010, the presentence and local credit scheme was revised to a more favorable rate with the exception of those inmates who were required to register as a sex offender, or committed for a serious felony or had a prior conviction for a violent or serious felony. (Former Pen. Code, § 4019, subds. (b)(2), (c)(2).) The trial court concluded that it…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Ellis
Case #: F063632
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 07/30/2012

The more favorable conduct credits available under the October 1, 2011 amendment to Penal Code section 4019 apply only to defendants whose crimes were committed on or after October 1. In several Kern County cases appellant entered plea agreements on September 9, 2011. On October 13, 2011 he was sentenced to county jail pursuant to section 1170, subdivision (h). Over appellant's equal protection objection, the court awarded him presentence credits of 91 actual days plus 44 days of conduct credit. On appeal he asserted that he was entitled to have his presentence conduct credit calculated under amended section 4019, which…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Brown
Case #: S181963
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 06/18/2012

Prospective application of the January 25, 2010 amendment to Penal Code section 4019, which increased the rate at which qualified inmates accrued presentence custody credits, is consistent with Legislative intent. "For eight months during 2010, a now superceded version of section 4019" increased the rate at which qualified inmates accrued presentence conduct credits. Under Penal Code section 3, penal laws are prospective unless the Legislature's intent to do otherwise is clear. The January 25, 2010 version of section 4019 contained no express declaration it was to be applied retroactively and no such implication arises from extrinsic sources (i.e., legislative history).…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Olague
Case #: H036888
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 05/07/2012
Subsequent History: Review granted 8/8/12: S203298

Prospective only application of the October 1, 2011 amendment to Penal Code section 4019 (presentence credits) does not violate a defendant's right to equal protection of the law. The defendant was sentenced to state prison for a serious felony on February 28, 2011. On appeal, defendant argued in part that he should have received day-for-day credits pursuant to the October 1, 2011 amendment to section 4019, which extended a more favorable formula to defendants who have a current or prior serious felony and who were previously denied those credits under prior versions of the statute. The express provision of subdivision…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Borg
Case #: A129258
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 04/02/2012
Subsequent History: Review granted 7/18/12: S202328

Prospective application of the October 1, 2011 amendment to Penal Code section 4019 (presentence credits) does not violate a defendant's right to equal protection. In 2010, appellant was convicted of stalking (Pen. Code, § 646.9, subd. (a)). A prior serious felony was found true. Appellant argued in part that he should have received day-for-day credits pursuant to the October 1, 2011 amendment to section 4019, which extended "a more favorable formula for enumerated classes of prisoners who were previously denied those credits under prior versions of the statute (i.e., those convicted of serious felonies, or who had serious/violent felony priors,…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Kurtenbach
Case #: D058933
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 04/12/2012

Consecutive sentence for concealing an event affecting an insurance benefit is not barred by Penal Code section 654 where the act occurred at a time subsequent to the other offense (arson) and was thus "a course of conduct divisible in time." Appellant's residence was destroyed by arson. The arsonist, who was allegedly recruited by appellant to burn the house, was killed in an explosion. Appellant was found guilty of conspiracy to commit arson and concealing an event affecting an insurance benefit, among other offenses. His consecutive sentence for failing to disclose an event affecting an insurance benefit was not barred…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Gisbert
Case #: G045619
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 04/09/2012

An award of presentence time credits for a period of time defendant was serving a sentence in a separate case is an unauthorized order that can be corrected at any time. While serving a prison sentence defendant sent a Penal Code 1381 demand to the district attorney requesting resolution of a separate case. In response to the demand, on his return to the trial court, he entered a guilty plea to this case and was sentenced to prison for a term to run concurrently to the one he was currently serving. Initially, over the prosecution's objection, the court…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Kunath
Case #: B232607
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 02/23/2012
Subsequent History: opn. mod. on 3/8/2012

Penal Code section 2900.5 allows for presentence credits to be simultaneously awarded to both concurrent sentences when they are imposed at the same time. The purpose of the statute is to equalize the total time in custody between those who were incarcerated presentence and those who were not. Kunath was arrested on charges and released on bail. A short time later he was arrested on new, unrelated charges and was held pending trial. He entered a plea on both cases and sentence was imposed at the same time. There was disparate credit with full custody credits on one sentence and…

View Full Summary
Name: Payton v. Superior Court (Orange County)
Case #: G045445
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 12/23/2011

Based on legislative intent, defendant is entitled to enhanced custody credits in effect when the custody is served even though his offense predates the January 25, 2010 amendment to Panel Code section 4019. Defendant pled guilty to a drug offense in May of 2008 and was placed on probation. In 2011 he admitted a probation violation and was sentenced to 90 days in jail, receiving 10 days of actual credit and four days of conduct credit. He petitioned the court for an award of day-for-day credits based on the January 25, 2010 amendment to Penal Code section 4019. The trial…

View Full Summary