A trial court correctly determined that it did not have the discretion to conditionally dismiss a “strike” in order to make appellant eligible for commitment to CRC. Penal Code section 667, subdivision (d) and section 1170.12, subdivision (b) specifically state that diversion shall not be granted nor shall a defendant be eligible for commitment to CRC. It could not be clearer that the Legislature intended persons who fell under these sections to be ineligible for CRC commitment. There is no authority for appellant’s proposal that the court conditionally strike his strike and order commitment to CRC, and no authority for reinstatement of the strike after it had been dismissed pursuant to section 1385. The court had the power to dismiss a strike outright and take the defendant out of the ambit of the Three Strikes Law. Appellant’s proposed procedure, however, was impermissible, and the court properly recognized the limitations on its discretion.