People v. Goodwin CA5

DISCUSSION

I. UNAUTHORIZED SENTENCE

Goodwin makes multiple arguments that the trial court should not have revoked probation: that the trial court exceeded its jurisdiction when it sentenced him to prison; that estoppel principles require that he be treated as eligible for probation; that this court should decline to void the probationary grant because to do so would be unfair and unjust; and that imposing a prison sentence in this circumstance violated due process. We find none of his arguments availing. There is no dispute that the grant of probation imposed by the trial court in 2012 was not an authorized sentence. Section 1203.065, subdivision (a) states specifically, in relevant part, that “probation shall not be granted to, nor shall the execution or imposition of sentence be suspended for, any person who is convicted of violating … Section 266h .…” If a defendant is statutorily ineligible for probation, the trial court has no jurisdiction to grant him probation and retains “‘no discretion but to sentence the defendant to an appropriate institution for such punishment or treatment as is provided by law.’” (People v. Orrante (1962) 201 Cal.App.2d 553, 557.) Granting…