Error and/or relief
The trial court erred by refusing to recalculate the defendant’s credit for time served on resentencing, instead deferring to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to make the calculation. The trial court was responsible for making this calculation.
First Holding:
Penal Code section 1237.1 requires that errors in the award of presentence custody credits be addressed to the sentencing court, even when the matter is pending on appeal. An erroneous credit calculation is an act in excess of the sentencing court’s jurisdiction and may be corrected by that court whenever brought to its attention.
Authority:
PEN 1237.1
People v. Wrice (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 767, 770
People v. Jack (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 913, 917
Second Holding:
The sentencing court must grant a defendant actual time credits both for the day of arrest and the day of sentencing. The defendant was originally sentenced on in 2022 and was credited with 476 presentence custody credits. He was resentenced in 2025 with the same number of credits.
Where, as here, a prison term already in progress is modified, the resentencing court must recalculate and credit against the modified sentence all actual time the defendant has already served. There are [nearly 900] days between and including the original sentencing date and the resentencing date. Therefore, the defendant is entitled to actual credits of [more than 1350] days. The trial court was responsible for making this calculation.
Authority:
People v. Buckhalter (2001) 26 Cal.4th 20, 29
People v. Salgado (2022) 82 Cal.App.5th 376, 381