Fear Not Law Articles: P. v. Hunter

P. v. Hunter

Filed 2/13/07 P. v. Hunter CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Nevada)

----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

SANDRA KAY HUNTER,

Defendant and Appellant.

C052012

(Super. Ct. No. SF05016C)

Defendant Sandra Kay Hunter entered a negotiated plea of no contest to possession of methamphetamine in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11377, subdivision (a). In exchange for her plea, she waived her right to request Proposition 36 drug treatment (Pen. Code, § 1210.1) and an additional count for possession of methamphetamine for sale was dismissed. The trial court placed defendant on probation with the condition she serve 270 days in county jail and complete an inpatient substance abuse program.

On appeal, defendant contends the provision in the plea agreement waiving Proposition 36 drug treatment was invalid as against public policy. We conclude that a determination on the merits of defendant's claim would be improper because she did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On August 8, 2005, defendant pled no contest to possession of methamphetamine. Defendant signed a written plea agreement which specified that, in exchange for her plea, an additional count for possession of methamphetamine for sale would be dismissed. The written plea agreement also specified that, as part of the plea agreement, there would be a nine-month maximum jail term and defendant waived her right to request Proposition 36 drug treatment.

At the time of the plea, the trial court reiterated that the plea agreement indicated a maximum jail term of nine months, defendant was waiving the provisions of Proposition 36, and defendant retained the right to petition the court to reduce the charge to a misdemeanor if she was successful on probation. The trial court asked defendant if that was correct and she said â€

Description	Defendant entered a negotiated plea of no contest to possession of methamphetamine in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11377, subdivision (a). In exchange for her plea, she waived her right to request Proposition 36 drug treatment (Pen. Code, S 1210.1) and an additional count for possession of methamphetamine for sale was dismissed. The trial court placed defendant on probation with the condition she serve 270 days in county jail and complete an inpatient substance abuse program. On appeal, defendant contends the provision in the plea agreement waiving Proposition 36 drug treatment was invalid as against public policy. Court conclude that a determination on the merits of defendant's claim would be improper because she did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. Accordingly, court dismiss the appeal.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.