McAlister

People v. McAlister

Good Law
1990 Cal. App. LEXIS 1242·225 Cal. App. 3d 941·275 Cal. Rptr. 229·90 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8654
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 31, 1990H006399California1,489 words

Opinion

Opinion

Capaccioli, J.

Summary

Defendant appeals after he pled guilty to possession of cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)), and was placed on probation for three years on condition he serve ninety days in jail. On appeal defendant argues the trial court erred by refusing to consider the merits of his motion to compel diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1000 et seq.) Alternatively, defendant contends the district attorney’s determination that he was ineligible for diversion was erroneous because there was insufficient evidence that he possessed the cocaine for sale. (Pen. Code, § 1000, subd. (a)(3).) As these contentions lack merit we will affirm.

Facts and Proceedings

The facts supporting the district attorney’s refusal to initiate diversion proceedings are undisputed. As part of a lawful investigation of defendant’s bedroom a sheriff’s deputy discovered and seized a plastic sifter with white powder residue on the screen, a metal sifter, two small scales, four small straws, several small coin bags (two of which had white powder residue), one plastic smoking pipe, two razor blades, three small glass vials with white powder residue, one empty small glass vial, two empty paper bindles and two…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.