People v. Legault

Opinion

HOLLENHORST, Acting P. J.

On August 16, 2000, San Bernardino police arrested defendant after he bought $10 worth of cocaine from an undercover officer during a reverse sting operation. A felony complaint charged him with possession of cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)). Pursuant to a negotiated agreement, he pled no contest to the charge in exchange for formal probation and 90 days in county jail. He agreed to a

Cruz

1

waiver with the understanding that the court “would then be free to sentence [him] to the maximum term set forth on the plea form”

2

if he “fail[ed] to appear for sentencing, commit[ted] any new offense while out on

[180]

this O[wn] R[ecognizance release], or fail[ed] to report to the probation department . . . .” The trial court released him on his own recognizance pending sentencing on October 18, 2000. Before the October sentencing date, he was taken into custody on a

Cruz

violation for possession of drug paraphernalia. On November 27, 2000, he admitted that he had violated the

Cruz

waiver and the trial court sentenced him to the upper three-year prison term.

Defendant appeals, arguing the passage, 20 days before he was sentenced, of Proposition 36, now Penal Code

3

sections 1210, 1210.1 and 3063.1, requires that he be granted probation and ordered into a treatment program.

Proposition 36, entitled the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000, was passed by California voters on November 7, 2000. The provisions of the proposition are codified in sections 1210, 1210.1, 3063.1, and division 10.8, commencing with section 11999.4 of the Health and Safety Code. By its terms, section 1210.1, subdivision (a),

4