P. v. Perkins
Filed 5/23/06 P. v. Perkins CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Shasta)
----
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOHN RAYMOND PERKINS, Defendant and Appellant. | C049767 (Super. Ct. No. 03F3883) |
Defendant John Raymond Perkins pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine and petty theft with a prior. He was sentenced to the lower term of 16 months for the possession offense and eight months for the theft, for a total of two years with 380 days' credit for time served. On appeal, defendant argues the trial court improperly denied him 69 days of custody credit for time served once his bond was exonerated, while he was serving time for an unrelated parole violation. We reject his contention and affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On March 25, 2003, a parole search of defendant's residence led to the seizure of over 18 grams of methamphetamine, 27 syringes, 2 portable scales, and other drug paraphernalia. Defendant admitted to possessing the methamphetamine and paraphernalia. A complaint was filed on December 10, 2003. On November 2, 2004, while on bail pending trial in the present case, defendant was taken into custody on a parole violation and transported to state prison.[1] On November 3, 2004, the trial court exonerated defendant's bond at defense counsel's request. In addition, counsel sought to withdraw defendant's speedy trial waiver; however, the court refused to change the trial date. On April 28, 2005, defendant pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine and petty theft with a prior. At his sentencing hearing, defendant requested custody credit for the 69 days he spent in state prison between the exoneration of his bond and his release from prison on January 11, 2005. The court denied defendant's request.
DISCUSSION
A defendant is entitled to credit for any time in custody which â€
