P. v. Casarez
Following pleas of no contest, defendant Paul Steve Casarez was sentenced at the same time in multiple cases. On appeal, defendant challenges the upper term imposed on his conviction of possession of a controlled substance following revocation of deferred entry of judgment (DEJ) in Case No. CR-11-01168. He also disputes the court's calculation of presentence credit in Case Nos. CR-11-01168 and CR-12-00027.[1]
We conclude that the trial court did not err in imposing the upper term in Case No. CR-11-01168. We agree, however, that defendant is entitled to additional presentence credit. Accordingly, we modify the judgment and affirm the judgment as modified.
Comments on P. v. Casarez