Penoli

People v. Penoli

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 536·46 Cal. App. 4th 298·53 Cal. Rptr. 2d 825·96 Daily Journal DAR 6591·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4078
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 6, 1996No. A068547California4,467 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kline, J.

The trial court placed Tiffany Anne Penoli on probation after she pled guilty to possessing methamphetamines. On appeal her attorney filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 [ 158 Cal.Rptr. 839 , 600 P.2d 1071 ], requiring this court to independently, review the record for arguable error. We directed the parties to brief the following issues: (1) Did the trial court err by adhering to a self-described “standard practice” of requiring, as a condition of probation, a prospective waiver of credit for time spent in residential drug rehabilitation? (2) Did the court delegate excessive judicial authority to the probation department to select a drug rehabilitation program? We have concluded that the first question must be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, we will reverse the order granting probation.

Background

According to the probation report, police were summoned in November 1994 by defendant’s sister, who told them defendant had entered her home without permission and had then departed, leaving behind three bindles of suspected methamphetamine. When questioned by police, defendant acknowledged injecting and possessing the substance, which tests…

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.