In People v. Lathrop (1993) 13 Cal.App.4th 1401, the defendant was arrested in Riverside County on an assault charge and bail was set at $ 20,000 (case 1). The same day, Orange County placed a "hold" on him for a drunk driving charge and set bail at $ 10,000 (case 2). Five months later, the defendant was transported to the Orange County jail, and the sentencing in case 1 was deferred pending resolution of case 2. At the sentencing on case 2, the court refused to award the defendant any presentence credits for the time spent in custody on case 1, and stated that presentence credits would be awarded at the time he was sentenced in case 1. ( Id. at pp. 1402-1403.) The Court of Appeal noted that there was no issue of duplicative credits because the defendant had not yet been sentenced in case 1. ( Id. at pp. 1403-1404.) It then noted the problem presented where the defendant is simultaneously in custody for two unrelated cases, and bail is set in both cases, the prosecution could argue in each case that the defendant was not entitled to credit due to the inability to post bail in that case, and the result could be that the defendant could be denied credit in both cases. As a solution to such problem, Lathrop held the first court to sentence the defendant should give credit without regard to the other case, giving credit from the time the defendant was arrested on that case or a hold was placed due to it. Subsequently, when and if the second court imposes sentence, it will not award credit for time already credited to the first sentence, avoiding duplicative credit. ( Id. at p. 1405.)