People v. Brown

California Court of Appeal Jun 7, 1984 No. Docket Nos. F002548, F002549Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that presentence custody credits for an earlier, unrelated offense cannot be applied to a subsequent burglary sentence, as the earlier custody was not attributable to the burglary proceedings.

Issues

Whether the trial court abused its discretion in imposing an upper base term for burglary.
Whether the trial court erred in denying the application of excess presentence credits from an earlier, unrelated conviction against the burglary sentence.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The simple fact is that appellant’s custody between October 1981 and June 1982 was not attributable to proceedings relating to the burglary.”

“That the burglary later became the basis for the May 1983 revocation of appellant’s probation in the attempt matters did not retroactively transform the burglary into the cause of his earlier confinement on the attempts.”

Opinion

THE COURT.

In Stanislaus County Superior Court action No. 178632 appellant was convicted in 1981 of attempted violations of Penal Code sec

[1133]

tions 484, and 487, subdivision 1. In October 1981 he was admitted to three years felony probation on each count, the conditions of which included one year local incarceration. In June 1982 appellant was released from county jail, having served 242 days actual time and received 120 days conduct credits. In Stanislaus County Superior Court action No. 186523 appellant was convicted in April 1983 of burglary. On May 9, 1983, appellant admitted that his conviction of a new criminal offense (the burglary) was a violation of his probation in action No. 178632. The trial court sentenced him to prison for the three-year upper base term on the burglary and four months on each attempt, the latter terms to run consecutive to the term for the burglary but concurrently with each other.

The trial court awarded appellant a total of 294 days presentence actual time and conduct credits on the burglary matter. The trial court also noted that appellant’s total presentence credits of 362 days on the attempts exceeded the consecutive terms which had been imposed and that “the total amount of time that he’ll be sentenced to the state prison would be three years with good time and work time credits of approximately 294 days.” On May 10, 1983, the trial court denied a defense request to apply the excess credits from the attempt matters against appellant’s three-year burglary sentence.

Appellant now contends the trial court abused its discretion in imposing the three-year upper base term on the burglary and in denying the defense motion for further credits against that term. Respondent disagrees.

I: Upper Base Term

II: Credits

Penal Code section 2900.5, subdivision (a) provides, in pertinent part: “In all felony and misdemeanor convictions, either by plea or by verdict, when the defendant has been in custody, ... all days of custody of the defendant, including days served as a condition of probation in compliance with a court order, and including days credited to the period of confinement pursuant to Section 4019, shall be credited upon his term of imprisonment .... If the total number of days in custody exceeds the number of days of

People v. Brown

AI Brief

THE COURT.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief