People v. Huff
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
EPSTEIN, J.
This is a presentence credit case. Appellant argues that the trial court failed to recognize all of the credit to which he is entitled; respondent contends that appellant received more credit than is legally warranted. We conclude that appellant is entitled to less credit than he received, although we do not fully accept respondent’s argument on the issue. We will modify the abstract of judgment to reflect the correct amount of presentence credit and, as so modified, we will affirm the judgment.
Procedural and Factual Summary
As is true of so many presentence cases, this one…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In Re RojasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- In Re SandelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- In Re AtilesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
- In Re JoynerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
- People v. AdrianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- In Re MarquezCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- The People v. JacobsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- In Re NicklesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- People v. PruittCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- In Re BustosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.