California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Pearson, 120 Cal.App.3d 782, 175 Cal.Rptr. 43 (Cal. App. 1981):
Appellant is correct about the length of the respective terms (see In re Eric J. (1979) 25 Cal.3d 522, 537-538, 159 Cal.Rptr. 317, 601 P.2d 549; People v. Fowler (1980) 109 Cal.App.3d 557, 567-568, 167 Cal.Rptr. 235), but otherwise his argument is a non sequitur. The asserted "absurdity" does not arise from the mandatory requirement that any jail term be consecutive. The asserted disparity flows from the computation of the consecutive term and exists whether the term is mandatory or discretionary. It would occur every time a trial court decided to impose a consecutive jail term under Penal Code section 4532, subdivision (b).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.