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. Julius Lee Ruff

February 7, 2013

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
JULIUS LEE RUFF, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.



(Super. Ct. No. CM034768)

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

P. v. Ruff

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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

Defendant Julius Lee Ruff pled no contest to corporal injury to the parent of one's child (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a))*fn1 and admitted a prior prison term allegation (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced defendant to five years in state prison and awarded 121 days of presentence credit (81 actual and 40 conduct).

On appeal, defendant contends (1) the trial court erred in relying on a prior serious felony conviction that was neither pled nor proved to reduce his conduct credits, and (2) he is entitled to additional conduct credits pursuant to the Criminal Justice Realignment Act of 2011 (Realignment Act) (Stats. 2011, ch. 15, § 482) under equal protection principles. Following the California Supreme Court's decision in People v. Lara (2012) 54 Cal.4th 896 at page 906, footnote 9 (Lara), we reject both contentions. We affirm the judgment.

DISCUSSION*fn2

I

Dismissed Prior Strike Conviction

Defendant contends that the trial court's reliance on a dismissed prior strike conviction to reduce his conduct credits violated the pleading and proof requirements of People v. Lo Cicero (1969) 71 Cal.2d 1186 (Lo Cicero).) We reject this contention.

A.

Background

The trial court calculated defendant's conduct credits under the September 28, 2010, amendments to sections 4019 and 2933. Under the law in effect at the time, a defendant was entitled to one day of conduct credit for each day of presentence confinement. (Former ยง 2933.) A defendant with a prior serious felony conviction received two days of conduct ...


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.