Renfro

People v. Renfro

Bad Law
125 Cal. App. 4th 223·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 2210·2004 Daily Journal DAR 15206·22 Cal. Rptr. 3d 680·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11231
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 22, 2004B172451California2,908 words

Opinion

Opinion

Perren, J.

While confined as a mentally disordered offender (MDO) (Pen. Code, § 2960 et seq.), Donald Renfro physically attacked hospital personnel. Prosecuted for offenses arising from this incident, Renfro entered into a plea bargain that not only included a guilty plea to one offense, but also declared that the offense was not caused or aggravated by a severe mental disorder and could not be used as a qualifying offense for a subsequent MDO commitment. (§ 2962, subd. (b).)

Before his release from prison, the Board of Prison Terms determined that Renfro was an MDO and, contrary to his plea bargain, MDO proceedings were initiated. At trial, the court refused to enforce the plea agreement, and found that Renfro satisfied all criteria for commitment as an MDO. Renfro appeals from the judgment, contending that the trial court violated his constitutional right to the benefit of his plea agreement.

We hold that a plea bargain may not be conditioned on a judicial finding that the subject offense falls outside the MDO law. We conclude that the provision in Renfro’s plea agreement that prevents use of his offense as the qualifying offense for commitment as an MDO is not a proper subject…

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.