People v. Castanon CA3

California Court of Appeal Sep 24, 2014 No. C075024Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the defendant failed to meet his burden of establishing entitlement to additional presentence custody credits because he did not demonstrate that his custody was attributable solely to the conduct underlying his current conviction rather than his parole revocation.

Issues

Whether the defendant is entitled to additional presentence custody credits for time served during a parole revocation commitment.
Whether the trial court violated the defendant's due process rights by denying credit for time served while parole revocation proceedings were pending.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“a prisoner is not entitled to credit for presentence confinement unless he shows that the conduct which led to his conviction was the sole reason for his loss of liberty during the presentence period.”

“Defendant bears the burden of establishing entitlement to presentence custody credits.”

“The trial court was entitled to rely on defendant’s optional waiver in denying the request for additional credit.”

Filed 9/24/14 P. v. Castanon CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Yolo) ----

THE PEOPLE, C075024

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CRF132461)

LORENZO MAXIMILLIANO CASTANON, JR.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Lorenzo Maximilliano Castanon, Jr., pleaded no contest to illegal possession of ammunition by a person prohibited from possessing a firearm. (Pen. Code, § 30305, subd. (a)(1).)1 The trial court sentenced him to four years in prison--the stipulated sentence--and awarded presentence custody credits of 64 days.

1 Further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

On appeal, defendant contends he is entitled to additional presentence custody credits. Disagreeing, we affirm. BACKGROUND West Sacramento police officers made contact with defendant on June 19, 2013. They found a loaded nine-millimeter handgun two feet away from the spot where he was standing on a public street. They searched him and found a knife and five rounds of ammunition similar to the rounds loaded in the handgun. A records check revealed that he was a parolee at large and, as a result, he was placed on a parole hold upon his incarceration.2 (§ 3056.) On June 27, 2013, defendant was charged by complaint with carrying a loaded firearm in public (§ 25850, subds. (a), (c)(1)), possessing a firearm after having been convicted of a felony (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1)), and possessing ammunition after having been convicted of a felony (§ 30305, subd. (a)). The complaint further alleged that defendant had previously been convicted of a serious felony within the meaning of section 667, subdivisions (c) and (e)(1) and had served a prior prison term within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b). On July 10, 2013, defendant accepted an offer of 180 days in jail and waived his right to a parole revocation hearing under the “optional waiver” provision of California Code of Regulations, title 15, section 2641, subdivision (b).3

People v. Castanon CA3

AI Brief

THE PEOPLE, C075024

LORENZO MAXIMILLIANO CASTANON, JR.,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

DUARTE , J.

BUTZ , J.

AI Brief