P. v. Shafer CA1/2
Defendant Glen Hollis Shafer appeals from the trial court’s order sentencing him to a maximum prison term after he violated his probation for the fifth time. He argues the trial court erred when it imposed this maximum term without deducting 88 days he previously spent in custody after his fourth probation violation. As a condition to the reinstatement of probation after this fourth violation, defendant waived his credits for this time in custody “for all purposes.” He now argues that regardless of his prior waiver, the trial court’s failure to deduct these 88 days from his total sentence resulted in its imposition of a sentence that was beyond the maximum allowed by law and exceeded the court’s jurisdiction. We conclude the trial court properly imposed the maximum sentence on defendant without deducting his 88 days in custody, which he previously waived as a legitimate condition of probation. Therefore, we affirm.
Comments on P. v. Shafer CA1/2