In Re Smith

California Court of Appeal Feb 27, 1986 No. Crim. 14150Published

Before: Evans

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a prisoner is not entitled to one-for-one worktime credits under Penal Code section 2933 for time spent in county jail awaiting trial on separate charges, as such credits must be earned through participation in a qualifying program.

Issues

Whether a prisoner is entitled to one-for-one worktime credits under Penal Code section 2933 while in custody for pending charges in another county.
Whether the denial of one-for-one credits violates a prisoner's constitutional rights to a speedy trial and equal protection.
Whether California Administrative Code, title 15, section 3043.2, subdivision (c) authorizes one-for-one credits for time spent out to court.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“When defendant does not participate, for whatever reason, he is not being punished; rather he is simply not being rewarded.”

Opinion

EVANS, J.

The People appeal from the order granting defendant’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus awarding defendant one-for-one credit pursuant to Penal Code section 2933 for time served while defendant was “out to court.” We will reverse the order.

Defendant was sentenced to state prison by the Placer County Superior Court on July 1, 1983. He was transferred to the California Correctional Institute at Tehachapi and on September 2, 1983, there enrolled in a program which permitted him to earn one-for-one credits as provided by Penal Code section 2933. On December 1, 1983, pursuant to defendant’s request to have pending charges against him in Alameda County resolved (Pen. Code, § 1381), defendant was transferred to Alameda County. From December 1, 1983, to April 25, 1984, defendant remained in the custody of Alameda County jailers after which he was returned to Tehachapi.

Pursuant to California Department of Corrections classification manual, chapter 300, section 314, subdivision (e), defendant was refused one-for-one credit for the time he was confronting the pending charges in Alameda County, and was placed in a category of persons earning credit at the rate of one-for-two. Following unsuccessful petitions to the Department of Corrections seeking credit on a one-for-one basis for the time served in Alameda County, defendant was granted relief by the Placer County Superior Court.

[34]

Penal Code section 2933 provides for credit toward a defendant’s release date at a one-for-one ratio where, as here, the defendant participates in a qualified program. Subdivision (b) of section 2933 provides in pertinent part: “Worktime credit is a privilege, not a right. Worktime credit must be earned . ...” As we stated in

People

Caddick

(1984) 160 Cal.App.3d 46, 52 [206 Cal.Rptr. 454], “Section 2933 advances the Legislature’s intent to instill marketable skills and good work habits in prisoners to facilitate their rehabilitation and reintegration into society and achieve prison self-sufficiency.”

In Re Smith

AI Brief

EVANS, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief