Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

People v. Culp

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 7, 2002No. F038699PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WISEMAN, J.

This appeal presents the sole issue of whether the trial court erred in refusing to aggregate noncontinuous periods that defendant spent in presentence custody when calculating good behavior and work performance credits (good/work credits) pursuant to Penal Code 1 section 4019. We conclude this was error and direct the court to amend the abstract of judgment to reflect an award of two additional days of credit.

Procedural History

By information, William Wayne Culp (defendant) was charged with six felonies: (1) possessing methamphetamine for sale (count 1; Health & Saf. Code, §…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. People v. BartonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Ghirardo v. AntonioliCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  3. People v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
  4. People v. FaresCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
  5. People v. BravoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. In Re AlbertoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  2. People v. McKenzie, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  3. People v. KimbellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  4. People v. CastellanosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  5. Nunez-Dosangos v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2024

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API