Legal Opinion

People v. Dieck

California Supreme Court

Decided June 25, 2009No. S158076PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

MORENO, J.

We consider here whether a defendant must spend at least six days in custody prior to being sentenced to be entitled to “conduct credit” pursuant to Penal Code section 4019. We conclude that the statute does not require that a defendant spend six days in presentence confinement in order to be entitled to receive conduct credit pursuant to section 4019. Rather, the statute entitles a defendant to conduct credit if he or she is sentenced to, or otherwise committed for, a period of at least six days, without regard to the duration of presentence confinement.

Background

Defendant…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Diamond Multimedia Systems, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  2. People v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  3. People v. BuckhalterCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  4. People v. SnookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Hoechst Celanese Corp. v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001

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

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. People v. RajanayagamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  2. People v. KennedyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  3. People v. ChilelliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
  4. People v. RaybonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2021
  5. People v. TorresCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011

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

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

Powered by the Exa API