P.

P. v. Thomas CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 30, 2013D062633California444 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mcdonald, J.

FACTS

At the readiness conference, there was no plea agreement with the district

attorney's office. However, the trial court had indicated that if Thomas pleaded guilty the

court would impose a maximum sentence of 32 months in state prison, to run

concurrently with any term for his parole violation, and would consider commitment to

the California Rehabilitation Center (CRC). Considering those assurances, Thomas

pleaded guilty to all charges and admitted all allegations.

At the subsequent sentencing hearing, defense counsel stated Thomas wished to

withdraw his guilty plea. The basis for withdrawing the plea was that Thomas, as well as

counsel and the court, believed commitment to CRC was an option, but that option had

been foreclosed by extraneous events. The court advised Thomas that, even if it had been

legally permitted to grant Thomas a return to CRC, it would not have granted his request

because of the information in the probation report, but it would still adhere to the other

previously-indicated benefit of imposing a 32-month sentence, and asked Thomas what

2 he wished to do. After conferring with Thomas, defense counsel stated he wanted to

proceed 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.