Madrigal

People v. Madrigal

Good Law
2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 53·2000 Daily Journal DAR 1061·77 Cal. App. 4th 1050·92 Cal. Rptr. 2d 205·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 715
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 27, 2000No. B129746California1,567 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Yegan, J.

Elias Sanchez Madrigal unsuccessfully appeals from the judgment entered after the trial court revoked probation and sentenced him to five years in state prison for selling cocaine. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a).) He contends that the probation department violated his speedy trial rights because it did not locate him in federal prison and timely initiate *1052 a probation revocation so that he could move for a concurrent sentence. We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

On June 2, 1995, appellant entered a plea of guilty to selling cocaine. When arrested on this offense, appellant had a fraudulent “green card” which identified him as Armando Diaz Paz. Even though he was on parole for a previous sale of cocaine, the trial court granted probation on various terms and conditions, e.g., that he serve 365 days in jail, report to the Santa Barbara County Probation Department upon his release from custody, and advise the probation department “. . . of his place of residence.” Other than serving the 365 days in jail, appellant never attempted to comply with any of the terms and conditions of probation. At no time after serving the 365 days in jail did he ever seek to…

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.