Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People v. Jacoby Donell Cushman

January 25, 2013

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
JACOBY DONELL CUSHMAN, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.



(Super. Ct. Nos. NCR81786, NCR81802)

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hoch , J.

P. v. Cushman

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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

On appeal, defendant Jacoby Donell Cushman contends that (1) the prospective application of the Criminal Justice Realignment Act of 2011 (Realignment Act) (Stats. 2011, ch. 15, § 482) violates his right to equal protection of the law, and (2) the trial court did not determine defendant's ability to pay various fines and fees or specify the statutory basis for each fine, fee, and assessment. Following the California Supreme Court's recent decision in People v. Lara (2012) 54 Cal.4th 896 at page 906, footnote 9 (Lara), we reject defendant's equal protection contention. With respect to the fines and fees imposed upon defendant, we remand for a new hearing on fines and fees to allow the trial court to determine ability to pay and to itemize all fines, fees, and assessments. In all other respects, we affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND*fn1

Defendant committed his offenses on April 27, 2011, and May 18, 2011, by entering an occupied building with the intent to commit larceny and entering an inhabited dwelling with the intent to commit larceny.

Defendant pled guilty to first degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459)*fn2 in case No. NCR81786 and second degree burglary in case No. NCR81802. He was sentenced on November 7, 2011. The trial court imposed a stipulated sentence of four years and eight months in state prison and awarded 259 days of presentence credit (173 actual and 86 conduct).

The trial court sentenced defendant under the September 28, 2010, revision of the presentence credit law. Under that version, a defendant with a current or prior serious or violent felony conviction was entitled to two days of conduct credit for every four days of presentence custody. (Former §§ 2933, 4019.) Defendant's conviction for first degree burglary is a serious felony. (§ 1192.7, subd. (c)(18).)

DISCUSSION

I

Prospective Application of Section 4019

The Realignment Act amended section 4019, entitling defendants to two days of conduct credit for every two days of presentence custody. (ยง 4019, subds. (b), (c), (f).) The award of credits is not reduced by a defendant's prior conviction for a serious or violent felony. This provision applies prospectively to defendants serving presentence ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.