People v. Dinkins CA2/3

Filed 5/16/14 P. v Dinkins CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE, B248329

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NA078034) v.

JONATHON DANIEL DINKINS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, James B. Pierce, Judge. Modified and, as modified, affirmed with directions. Richard L. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Linda C. Johnson and Ana R. Duarte, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_________________________

Appellant Jonathon Daniel Dinkins appeals from the judgment entered following his plea of no contest to possessing cocaine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351) with admissions he suffered a prior felony conviction (Pen. Code, § 667, subd. (d)) and a prior felony conviction for which he served a separate prison term (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)), and with an admission he committed the offense for the benefit of, at the direction of, and in association with, a criminal street gang (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. (b)(1)). The court sentenced appellant to prison for 13 years. We modify the judgment and, as modified, affirm it with directions. FACTUAL SUMMARY A detailed recitation of the facts of the present offense is unnecessary. Suffice it to say the record reflects appellant committed the present offense on April 15, 2008. ISSUES Appellant claims (1) he is entitled to additional precommitment credit and (2) his restitution fine and parole revocation fine must be reduced. DISCUSSION 1. Appellant Is Entitled to Additional Precommitment Credit. At the April 2, 2013 sentencing hearing, the court awarded appellant 1,478 days of precommitment credit, consisting of 1,232 days of custody credit and 246 days of conduct credit. Appellant claims he is entitled to 370 additional days of conduct credit. We agree. There is no dispute appellant spent a total of 1,232 days in custody during the period from April 15, 2008, when police arrested him, through April 2, 2013, when the court sentenced him, inclusive.1 Respondent concedes appellant’s claim appears to be