People v. Fischer CA4/3

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The underlying facts are contained in our prior opinion and are not relevant to the current appeal. According to the March 24, 2006 sentencing minute order, the trial court awarded Fischer credit for time served of 741 actual days and 111 days of conduct credit, totaling 852 days. The abstract of judgment conforms to the minute order. On March 29, 2013, Fischer filed a “Motion to Correct Abstract of Judgment.” He asserted he was entitled to credit for 920 actual days served and 138 days of conduct credit, for a total of 1058 days. The trial court‟s minutes reflect the court denied the order on April 23, 2013: “No appearances. [¶] Having received Defendant‟s purported motion for a corrected Abstract of Judgment, the court finds and orders as follows: The proof of service attached to the petition is defective. Defendant‟s request is therefore not in correct procedural form in that it is an ex parte communication with the court, rather than a properly noticed motion. (People v. Clavel (2002) 103 Cal.App4th 516, 518-519.) Moreover, Defendant fails to demonstrate his entitlement to credit for the period he seeks and, based on his Los Angeles County…