Cerda v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal Oct 15, 1974 No. Civ. 34274Published

Before: Molinari

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. A prisoner is entitled to presentence credit under Penal Code section 2900.5 for time spent in jail under a parole hold that was attributable to new criminal charges, regardless of whether such credit results in a double credit against a prior sentence.

Issues

Whether a prisoner is entitled to presentence credit under Penal Code section 2900.5 for time served in county jail under a parole hold while awaiting trial on new charges.
Whether the retroactive application of Penal Code section 2900.5 requires granting credit for presentence custody attributable to new charges despite potential double credit concerns.

Disposition. granted

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“In any event under the provisions of section 2900.5 and the interpretation placed on it by Kapperman petitioner is entitled to credit upon the sentence on the new charges for the period of time he was in custody in the county jail”

“if as asserted by the People a double credit will result we see no proscription against such a consequence in the language of section 2900.5 as interpreted by Kapperman.”

Opinion

MOLINARI, P. J.

Petitioner seeks a writ of mandate ordering respondent superior court to file his notice of appeal from its order denying him credit for the time he was detained in the county jail pursuant to a parole hold while awaiting trial on pending criminal charges. Since the relief sought is properly the subject of relief by way of habeas corpus we have treated the petition as one for habeas corpus and have issued an order to show cause why the relief prayed for should not be granted.

On November 17, 1970, petitioner was arrested upon criminal charges while on parole. A parole hold was placed on him and he remained confined in the county jail until February 19, 1971, when he was sentenced to the state prison for conviction of second degree burglary and possession of drugs. Petitioner asserts he is entitled to credit of 103 days on this sentence for his confinement prior to said sentence.

[493]

Penal Code section 2900.5,

enacted in 1971 and effective as of March 4, 1972, provides, in pertinent part, as follows: “(a) In all felony convictions . . . when the defendant has been in custody in any city, county, or city and county jail, all days of custody of the defendant from the date Of arrest to the date on which the serving of the sentence imposed commences . . . shall be credited upon his sentence ...(b) For the purposes of this section, credit shall be given only where the custody to be credited is attributable to charges arising from the same criminal act or acts for which the defendant has been convicted. ...”

In re Kapperman

(1974) 11 Cal.3d 542, 549 [114 Cal.Rptr. 97, 522 P.2d 657], it was held that “section 2900.5 must be applied to all felony convictions, and not only to those in which presentence detention occurred as a result of indigency and ability to post bail.”

Kapperman

also holds that section 2900.5 is fully retroactive notwithstanding the contrary provision of its subdivision (c).

Cerda v. Superior Court

AI Brief

MOLINARI, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief