People v. Sweat CA2/6

Filed 11/23/20 P. v. Sweat CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B301600 (Super. Ct. No. BA431774 ) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County)

v.

SESMON SWEAT,

Defendant and Appellant.

Sesmon Sweat seeks a remand for a determination of custody credits (Pen. Code,1 § 2900.5) and a correction of the abstract of judgment to conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement of judgment. We remand without prejudice the issue of custody credits. We correct the abstract of judgment. FACTS In February 2016, Sweat pled guilty to robbery (§ 211) and admitted he had a prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)(1).) The trial court sentenced him to a five-year upper term for the robbery and a consecutive five years for the prior serious

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code.

felony conviction, for a total term of 10 years. The trial court suspended execution of the sentence and placed him on formal probation for three years on condition that he serve 812 days in county jail. He was given presentence custody credit for the 812 days. On October 11, 2018, Sweat was arrested for violating section 288.4, arranging to meet a minor for lewd and lascivious behavior. On October 15, 2018, Sweat’s probation was summarily revoked for violating a condition of his probation. The prosecutor elected to dismiss the charge of violating section 288.4 and to proceed with the probation violation hearing. The trial court dismissed the charge of violating section 288.4 on December 13, 2018. On September 20, 2019, the trial court held a probation violation hearing. The court lifted the suspension of sentence and sentenced Sweat to 10 years with 812 days’ custody credit earned prior to his placement on probation. He received no custody credit for the time between when he was placed in custody for a parole violation and the time the suspension of his 10-year sentence was lifted. At the hearing Sweat asked the trial court if he was entitled to additional custody credits for the time spent in custody on probation. The trial court replied “I’m not sure right now, but it looks like you might.” Sweat did not pursue the matter further in the trial court. The abstract of judgment reflects no custody credits beyond the 812 earned prior to his placement on probation.