P. v. Guillmeno
Pursuant to an open plea to the court, defendant pleaded guilty to four counts of sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, 11352, subd. (a)). In addition, she admitted that she had four enhancements that made her presumptively ineligible for probation (Pen. Code, 1203.073, subd. (b)(7)) and that she had suffered a prior strike conviction ( 667, subds. (c), (e)(1), 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)). The plea agreement was conditional on the fact that probation would be denied and that defendant would be ordered to undergo a 90 day diagnostic study pursuant to section 1202.03. Following a sentencing hearing, defendant was sentenced to a total term of eight years in state prison: four years doubled to eight years on count 1; sentences on counts 2 through 4 were imposed concurrently. Additionally, the entire case was ordered to run concurrent with the sentence imposed in case No. RIF 102028, for which defendants probation was revoked as a result of the current case. Defendants sole contention on appeal is that the sentencing court abused its discretion by predetermining it would not consider probation or other commitment, thereby foreclosing any invitation to exercise its discretion pursuant to section 1385. Court reject this contention and affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Guillmeno