People v. Valdes

Annotate this Case

Defendant appealed a judgment following his conviction for second degree robbery, with a finding that he used a deadly or dangerous weapon in the commission of the offense. After defendant was sentenced to an aggregate prison term of 11 years, he moved for correction of presentence custody credits and abstract of judgment, claiming he was entitled to "an additional one (1) presentence credit day for a total of 296 presentence credit days." The trial court denied the motion.

The Court of Appeal reversed, agreeing with defendant that his 11 year sentence must be reduced by one day. In this case, defendant's 38-day good time/work time credit entitles him to a total credit of 296 days instead of 295. Accordingly, the court remanded to the trial court with instructions to correct the sentence. The court affirmed in all other respects.

Download PDF

Filed 8/21/20 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, 2d Crim. No. B300910 (Super. Ct. No. YA097954) (Los Angeles County) v. JOSEPH ARI VALDES, Defendant and Appellant. Prologue: A Court of Appeal opinion is an explanation for a decision. In most cases the opinion should contain only the necessary facts and law to support the issue or issues to be decided. To aid the litigants, their attorneys, and the public, the opinion should be concise, readable, and filed with reasonable dispatch. Generally the opinion should not mimic law review articles. We hope to follow this model in what follows. After a negotiated plea agreement, Joseph Ari Valdes appeals a judgment following his conviction for second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211), with a finding that he used a deadly or dangerous weapon in the commission of the offense (id., § 12022, subd. (b)(1)). He was sentenced to an aggregate prison term of 11 years. Valdes subsequently moved for correction of presentence custody credits and abstract of judgment. He claimed he was entitled to “an additional one (1) presentence credit day for a total of 296 presentence credit days.” Because his defense counsel miscalculated his actual presentence custody credits, Valdes said he was “entitled to 258 actual custody credit days.” The trial court denied the motion. Valdes, the People, and we agree that Valdes’s 11-year sentence be reduced by one day. Valdes is entitled to 258 days actual custody credit instead of 257 days. His 38-day good time/work time credit entitles him to a total credit of 296 days instead of 295. “A defendant is entitled to actual custody credit for ‘all days in custody’ in county jail and residential treatment facilities, including partial days.” (People v. Rajanayagam (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 42, 48.) “Calculation of custody credit begins on the day of arrest and continues through the day of sentencing.” (Ibid.) “ ‘The law takes no notice of fractions of a day. Any fraction of a day is deemed a day . . . .’ ” (People v. Smith (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 523, 526.) The day the defendant is arrested counts as a custody credit day no matter how many hours or minutes the defendant was in jail on that day. (Ibid.; Rajanayagam, at p. 48.) In such instances, arithmetic may be confounding. 2 DISPOSITION The case is remanded to the trial court with instructions to correct the sentence finding on actual time served for presentence custody credits to 258 days, to increase the “total days” credit for presentence credit time to 296 days, and to amend and serve a corrected abstract of judgment. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed. CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION. GILBERT, P. J. We concur: YEGAN, J. PERREN, J. 3 Hector M. Guzman, Judge Superior Court County of Los Angeles ______________________________ Christopher Love, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Stephanie C. Brenan and Nathan Guttman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. 4

Primary Holding

Defendant's 38-day good time/work time credit entitles him to a total credit of 296 days instead of 295.

Disclaimer: Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.