Thurman

People v. Thurman

Good Law
125 Cal. App. 4th 1453·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 86·23 Cal. Rptr. 3d 659·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 730
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 26, 2005No. C044448California3,065 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Scotland, J.

After his motion to suppress evidence was denied, defendant Kelly Thurman pled no contest to possession of cocaine and was granted probation pursuant to Proposition 36, on the conditions that he complete a drug treatment program (Pen. Code, § 1210.1) and that he waive his entitlement to any future custody credit for time he spends in a residential drug treatment program (Pen. Code, § 2900.5, subd. (a); further section references are to this code unless otherwise specified). He appeals.

In the published part of this opinion, we reject defendant’s contention that the trial court erred when it required him to waive future custody credits. As we will explain, given their ordinary, commonsense meaning consistent with the apparent purpose of the statute, the words of section 1210.1, subdivision (a), authorize a trial court to require a defendant, as a condition of probation, to waive entitlement to section 2900.5, subdivision (a), custody credits for time that the defendant spends in a residential drug treatment facility.

*1458 In unpublished parts of this opinion, we reject another attack on this condition of probation and find no merit in his claim that the court should…

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.