People v. Rajanayagam, 149 Cal. Rptr. 3d 313

Rajanayagam pled guilty to elder and dependent adult abuse (Pen. Code, § 368, subd. (b)(1)) and aggravated assault (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)).
Offense date: August 20, 2011; counts reduced to misdemeanors on October 31, 2011.
Sentence: informal probation for three years and 180 days in jail.
Dispute over presentence conduct credits under section 4019, as amended by the Realignment Act.
Court held the defendant is not entitled to enhanced conduct credits under the current version of §4019 for time served before October 1, 2011; equal protection and statutory construction arguments rejected.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Rajanayagam is entitled to enhanced presentence conduct credits	Rajanayagam contends the operative date for enhanced credits is the sentencing date	Rajanayagam concedes no entitlement under plain statutory language; asserts equal protection	No; enhanced credits apply only to offenses committed on/after Oct 1, 2011 under subdivision (h) and are not retroactive.
Interpretation of subdivision (h) of §4019 regarding timing of credits	The second sentence may imply credits earned after Oct 1, 2011 apply under current law	First sentence controls; second sentence cannot render the first superfluous	The first sentence governs; subdivision (h) does not extend the enhanced rate to pre- Oct 1, 2011 offenses.”},{

People v. Brown, 54 Cal.4th 314 (Cal. 2012) (prospective application of amendments; retroactivity analyzed under Brown)
People v. Ellis, 207 Cal.App.4th 1546 (Cal. App. Dist. 4th 2012) (interpretation of subdivision (h) fidelity to legislative intent)
Cruz v. Cruz, 207 Cal.App.4th 664 (Cal. App. Dist. 4th 2012) (Realignment Act purpose and conduct credits limitations)
In re Kapperman, 11 Cal.3d 542 (Cal. 1974) (distinguishes custody vs. conduct credits)
Hofsheier v. Hofsheier, 37 Cal.4th 1185 (Cal. 2006) (equal protection framework for classifications in statute)