People v. Olvera CA4/1

I.

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Jesus U. Olvera appeals from a judgment of conviction after he pled

guilty to bringing 4.7 kilos of methamphetamine into the United States from Mexico,

after having previously been convicted of possession of a large amount of cocaine for

sale and while on mandatory supervision for that prior crime.

On appeal, Olvera contends that his plea agreement required the trial court to

impose a split sentence if he was otherwise eligible for one under the law.1 He contends

in the alternative that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to impose a split

sentence.

We conclude that the written recording of the terms of the plea agreement, which

includes much shorthand, including the phrase "split if eligible," is ambiguous as to

whether the parties agreed that Olvera would automatically receive a split sentence if he

was determined to be eligible for such a sentence under the law, or rather, that the court

would consider imposing a split sentence if it was determined that he was eligible for

such a sentence under the law. The parties' subsequent conduct, in response to the trial

court's description of the terms of the plea agreement…