P. v. Nava CA6
Defendant Julian Castro Diaz Nava argues that the trial court engaged in unlawful plea bargaining when, pursuant to a plea agreement that promised Nava would not receive a sentence longer than six years in prison, the trial court gave Nava the option of either receiving a prison sentence or serving a probationary sentence if he waived a number of custody credits. The Attorney General counters that Nava’s appeal must be dismissed because he failed to get a certificate of probable cause and because he expressly waived his appellate rights as part of his plea agreement. We agree with the Attorney General that, under the circumstances of his case, Nava was required to—but did not—obtain a certificate of probable cause in order to appeal.
Comments on P. v. Nava CA6