Barella

In People v. Cortez (1997) 55 Cal.App.4th 426 [ 64 Cal.Rptr.2d 71 ] (Cortez), the Court of Appeal for the Fifth Appellate District held that a trial judge is not required to advise a defendant, upon his or her guilty plea, that the “Three Strikes” law (Pen. Code §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12) limits the defendant’s ability to earn conduct and work credits while incarcerated. In the present case, the Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District (Division Three) expressly disagreed with the reasoning set forth in Cortez , instead determining that in sentencing under the Three Strikes law, the trial court was required to advise defendant, prior to his guilty plea, that he was ineligible for parole until he had served four-fifths of his sentence. We granted the People’s petition for review to resolve the conflict.

As we shall explain, the United States Supreme Court has stated that a defendant’s parole eligibility date is not a direct consequence of which a defendant must be apprised before pleading guilty. (Hill v. Lockhart (1985) 474 U.S. 52, 55-56 [ 106 S.Ct. 366, 368-369 , 88 L.Ed.2d 203 ].) The credit limitation contained within the Three Strikes law serves a role…