APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County.(Super.Ct.Nos. FWV902022, FWV901621 & FVA900402) David Cohn, Judge. Affirmed.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hollenhorst J.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
On March 26, 2009, defendant and appellant Lorna Rose Robinson pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine for sale in case No. FVA900402. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378.) The trial court placed her on probation for a period of three years. On September 25, 2009, she pled guilty to one count of possession of a controlled substance in case No. FWV901621. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)). That same day, she also pled guilty to one count of possession of illegal substances in a jail facility in case No. FWV902022. (Pen. Code, § 4573.6.)*fn1 The trial court placed defendant on probation for a period of three years on both cases. She was then directed to attend a residential drug treatment program at Cedar House. Defendant subsequently admitted to violating her probation. On April 14, 2010, the trial court revoked and terminated her probation. It then sentenced her to state prison for two years in case No. FVA900402, two years in case No. FWV901621, and two years in case No. FWV902022, and ordered all three sentences to run concurrent. In case No. FWV901621 the court awarded 72 days of custody credit, consisting of 39 days actual credit and 33 days conduct credit. In case Nos. FVA900402 and FWV902022, the court awarded 106 days of credits, consisting of 61 actual days and 45 days of conduct credit.
On appeal, defendant contends that she is entitled to additional
conduct credits under the January 25, 2010 amendment of section 4019,
since she was sentenced after the effective date of the amendment.*fn2
Defendant Is Not Entitled to Additional Credits
As of April 14, 2010, when defendant was sentenced, she had been in actual custody for 61 days, consisting of 31 days in 2009 and 30 days in 2010.*fn3 The trial court awarded her 45 days of conduct credit under section 4019, based on the 61 actual days in custody, as follows: 15 days under the 2009 version of section 4019 (for 31 days actually served in 2009) and 30 days under the 2010 version of section 4019 (for 30 days actually served in 2010). Defendant now claims she is entitled to "day for day" conduct credits under the amended version of section 4019 for the time served in 2009, as well as 2010, since she was not sentenced until April 14, 2010, after the effective date of the amendment. The crux of her argument is that the ...