People v. Grewell CA4/1

DISCUSSION

This case presents a question of statutory interpretation, a question of law we

review de novo. (People v. Ravaux (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 914, 919.) We look to

the words of the statute itself, which is normally the best indicator of the lawmakers'

intent. (People v. Goodloe (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 485, 490-491.) If the statutory

words are clear and unambiguous, we may not modify them to accomplish a purpose

not apparent on the face of the statute or from its legislative history. (Ibid.)

A defendant is entitled to credit for time "in custody, including, but not limited

to, any time spent in a jail, camp, work furlough facility . . . or similar residential

institution." (§ 2900.5, subd. (a).) Subdivision (b) of section 2900.5, provides that

presentence custody credits shall be given "only where the custody to be credited is

attributable to proceedings related to the same conduct for which the defendant has

been convicted." (Italics added.) A sentencing court has a duty "to determine the

date or dates of any admission to, and release from, custody prior to sentencing."

(§ 2900.5, subd. (d), italics added.)

Where, as here, a defendant is serving concurrent…