Skip to content
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
Name: People v. Voravongsa
Case #: A130098
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 07/14/2011
Subsequent History: Rev. granted 8/31/11 (S195672)

Penal Code section 1385 does not give trial court the authority to dismiss prior convictions to accord a defendant more favorable presentence conduct credits. Defendant challenged the court's denial of his Romero (People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497) motion to strike a prior serious felony, not only for probation eligibility, but also for enhanced presentence credits under the January 25, 2010 amendment to Penal Code section 4019. The First District found that a prior which precludes an award of enhanced presentence credits may not be stricken for credits purposes, noting related issues (i.e., whether the 4019 amendment…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. James
Case #: D057527
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 06/24/2011
Subsequent History: Rev. granted 8/31/11 (S195512)

No pleading and proof requirement applies to the less favorable credit provision of Penal Code section 4019, and a court may consider a dismissed prior serious felony for purposes of sentencing. Appellant pled guilty to one count of possession of a controlled substance and admitted a prior prison term. Other allegations, including a strike prior, were dismissed. At sentencing the court denied him enhanced presentence credits, finding appellant's strike prior rendered him ineligible. Under section 2900.5, a defendant sentenced to prison is entitled to credits for all time in custody prior to sentencing. On January 25, 2010, section 4019 was…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Pacheco
Case #: H035418
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 03/17/2011

A prior juvenile adjudication for Penal Code section 186.22 (participation in a criminal street gang) is not an exception to the day-for-day presentence credit calculation scheme of amended Penal Code section 4019. By his guilty plea, appellant was convicted of assault likely to cause great bodily injury and the court found true the allegation that appellant had a prior "Strike" resulting from a juvenile court adjudication for participation in a criminal street gang. The appellate court agreed with appellant that because his juvenile court adjudication is not a "conviction" (see Welf. & Inst. Code, sec. 203), it was not a…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Lara
Case #: H036143
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 03/30/2011
Subsequent History: 5/18/11: review granted (S192784)

If a plea agreement does not specify the impact on the calculation of credits, then the sentencing court has discretion as to decide whether an order striking enhancements may also be applied to maximize the calculation of presentence credits. A Penal Code section 12022.7 great bodily injury enhancement as to current charges, as well as a prior strike conviction, would have precluded the more favorable presentence credits calculation in effect after January 25, 2010. The prosecutor indicated that those were dismissed and the strike was stricken as part of the plea bargain. Application of the less favorable calculation for the…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Moon
Case #: C065216
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 03/29/2011

Penal Code section 2933.2, subdivision (c), denying conduct credits for those convicted of murder, applies to a jail term served as a condition of probation. Moon was convicted of second degree murder based on a drunk driving incident in which his passenger was killed. He was granted formal probation for 12 years with a condition that he serve four years in county jail. He waived any objection to serving more than one year in county jail. He sought clarification from the trial court when his release date was recalculated to reflect that he would not earn conduct credits. The statutory…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Borlik
Case #: H034191
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 04/06/2011

A defendant convicted of a violent felony is subject to the limitation of Penal Code section 2933.1, when the sentence for the violent felony is stayed pursuant to Penal Code section 654. In a case similar to In re Pope (2010) 50 Cal.4th 777, petitioner was convicted by his plea of driving under the influence with great bodily injury (Veh. Code, sec. 23153, subd. (b) and Pen. Code, sec. 12022.7), and vehicular manslaughter (Pen. Code, sec. 191.5, subd. (a)). In accord with the plea bargain and pursuant to Penal Code section 1385, the court struck the punishment for the…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Nychay
Case #: D057107
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 03/17/2011
Subsequent History: 6/22/11 rev. granted (S192551)

When appellant is sentenced to state prison and there is then a limited remand of the case for correction of sentencing errors, there is no need to recalculate presentence credits. Appellant was sentenced to state prison and awarded 50 days of presentence credits. On appeal, he claimed that the trial court erred when it found it lacked discretion in the setting of the restitution fine. The appellate court agreed and remanded to allow the trial court to exercise its discretion. The trial court subsequently reduced the fine to $200. At this subsequent remand hearing, appellant contended that…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Koontz
Case #: B224697
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 03/02/2011
Subsequent History: 5/18/11: review granted (S192116)

Penal Code "section 1385 vests the trial court with the discretion to strike a prior serious felony conviction in order to afford the maximum allowable presentence conduct credits." Appellant pled guilty to child endangerment, and admitted a strike prior and two prison priors in exchange for an indicated three-year sentence. The court struck the strike prior and one of the prison priors to arrive at that sentence. Appellant then requested one-for-one conduct credits under amended section 4019. The court said it could not give those credits due to the prior strike conviction. Appellant argued that…

View Full Summary