Skip to content
Name: In re Mancillas
Case #: H042652
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 08/23/2016

A defendant whose probation has been summarily revoked “has been released on probation” within the meaning of Penal Code section 1203.2a and the jurisdictional limits for sentencing a probationer who has been imprisoned for another offense apply. Mancillas was placed on probation with execution of a three-year prison term suspended. He failed to report and his probation was summarily revoked. But before further proceedings were held, Mancillas was convicted of new offenses in Nevada and imprisoned there. On December 23, 2013, the trial court received notification that Mancillas was incarcerated in Nevada and his request for final disposition. Eight months later, the court ordered his previously imposed sentence to run consecutively to his Nevada sentence. Mancillas appealed and filed a habeas petition, arguing that the superior court lost jurisdiction over his case pursuant to section 1203.2a when it failed to sentence him within 60 days following notification that he was in prison. Held: Petition granted. Section 1203.2a sets forth the sentencing procedures for defendants who are committed to prison while on probation for another offense. As relevant here, section 1203.2a gives the probationary court “60 days from the receipt of notice of the confinement to order execution of sentence . . . . Failure to comply . . . divests the court of any remaining jurisdiction . . . .” (In re Hoddinott (1996) 12 Cal.4th 992, 994.) The fact that Mancillas’s probation had been summarily revoked prior to his section 1203.2a request did not alter the analysis: “To interpret section 1203.2a as applying only to probationers who were not in summary revocation status at the time of their subsequent incarceration for new offenses would lead to anomalous results and conflict with the policy underlying the statute . . . .” The order executing Mancillas’ three-year prison sentence was vacated and there was no remaining period of probation that could be reinstated.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: