People v. Baker CA5

Filed 4/14/14 P. v. Baker CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, F066827

v. (Super. Ct. No. BF133419A)

FRANKIE DELON BAKER, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Larry A. Errea, Judge. James F. Johnson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Catherine Chatman and Raymond L. Brosterhous II, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

 Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Poochigian, J., and LaPorte, J.†

† Judge of the Kings Superior Court assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

Appellant, Frankie Deleon Baker, pled no contest to indecent exposure with priors (Pen. Code,1 § 314, subd. 1) and admitted allegations that he had a prior strike conviction within the meaning of the three strikes law (§ 667, subd. (b)-(i)). This is Baker’s second appeal in this matter. In this appeal, Baker challenges the trial court’s denial of a hearing on a motion to correct his award of presentence custody credit. We conclude the order Baker appealed from was not an appealable order and dismiss the appeal. FACTS In January 2010 and on two occasions in July 2010, Baker was observed masturbating inside the Beale Library in Bakersfield. On June 29, 2011, Baker entered his plea in this matter. On November 2, 2011, the court sentenced Baker to a four-year term, the middle term of two years on the substantive offense, doubled to four years because of his prior strike conviction. Baker subsequently filed his first appeal in this matter (F063816). On June 28, 2012, while his first appeal was pending, the court granted Baker’s motion to award him presentence custody credit for time he spent in custody from August 5, 2010, through June 1, 2011, on a parole violation related to his indecent exposure conviction. On September 18, 2012, this court directed the parties to brief certain issues including whether the court erred in awarding Baker presentence custody credit for this period of time. In an unpublished opinion in case No. F063816, this court found the trial court erred by awarding Baker presentence custody credit for time he served on a parole violation and for time he was in custody after he was sentenced on the underlying