P.
P. v. Jackson CA4/2
Opinion
Opinion
facts that are pertinent to the issues we must resolve in this appeal.
2 exchange, the People would “dismiss [the] balance” of the counts and enhancement
allegations. Defendant subsequently pled guilty in accordance with his plea agreement.
However, neither the parties nor the trial court dismissed the remaining counts or prior
prison term enhancement allegations.
Defendant contends, and the People correctly concede, that he is entitled to a
dismissal of counts 1 through 5, as well as the prior prison term allegations. We agree.
“A negotiated plea agreement is a form of contract, and it is interpreted according to
general contract principles. [Citations.] „The fundamental goal of contractual interpretation
is to give effect to the mutual intention of the parties.‟ [Citation.] If contractual language is
clear and explicit, it governs. [Citation.]” (People v. Shelton (2006) 37 Cal.4th 759, 767.)
“ „The mutual intention to which the courts give effect is determined by objective
manifestations of the parties‟ intent, including the words used in the agreement, as well as
extrinsic evidence of such objective matters as the surrounding circumstances under which
the parties…