People v. Simpson CA3

DISCUSSION

2 1.0 The Court’s Remarks Did Not Violate the Doctrine of Separation of Powers

The trial court did not indicate its intentions before imposing sentence. After ordering defendant to surrender his driver’s license for transmittal to the DMV for revocation, defendant being subject to a lifetime license revocation (see Veh. Code, § 13351.5), the trial court “ordered [defendant] not to drive a motor vehicle without a valid California driver’s license” and “to complete whatever alcohol programs are going to be required of you in order to get your license back.” The proceedings ended at this point without any invitation to the parties to respond or further opportunity to object.

Defendant concedes the trial court could have properly advised him of these two requirements. He contends, however, that the trial court was not authorized pursuant to any statute to order him as a consequence of his present offenses not to drive and to complete an alcohol program in connection with any reinstatement of his license, and therefore violated the doctrine of separation of powers with respect to the determination of the punishment for a crime. (See People v. Rodriguez (1998) 66…