legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Chapman CA4/3
When the trial court sentenced Christopher Scott Chapman to probation, on the condition he serve one year in county jail, he had already amassed 376 days of presentence custody credits – meaning he was left with 11 days of excess credits. On appeal, he argues the court erred by failing to apply those excess custody credits to satisfy his restitution fine and court fees – a total of $510 – pursuant to Penal Code section 2900.5.
The Attorney General concedes Chapman is entitled to have his excess custody credits applied to satisfy certain fines, but argues that (1) under the applicable version of section 2900.5, he is entitled to be credited at a rate of only $30 per day of excess custody credit, rather than the $125 rate he claims, and (2) his credits cannot be applied to offset either his restitution fine or the court fees. Thus, under the Attorney General’s analysis, Chapman is not entitled to have any portion of his $510 payment obligation deemed satisfied.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale