An out-of-state prisoner awaiting sentence in California is not similarly situated to an out-of-state prisoner awaiting trial. After entering into a plea agreement but prior to sentencing, defendant left California and was imprisoned in Nevada on a different matter. While in prison in Nevada, defendant filed a request to resolve the case in California, but refused to waive his right to be present at sentencing. After he completed his term in Nevada, he was sentenced to prison in California. The Court of Appeal found that the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) does not apply to those who have been found guilty and are awaiting sentencing, but only to those who are still awaiting trial. The two groups of detainees are not similarly situated, because one of the purposes of the IAD is to ensure prompt resolution of pending charges. Where a prisoner has already been convicted and is merely awaiting sentencing, the concerns addressed by the IAD are greatly diminished. Thus, the failure to promptly resolve the defendant’s case did not violate Equal Protection. The court rejected defendant’s arguments that he should have been sentenced under either Penal Code section 1381 or section 1203.2a, noting that the former does not apply to out-of-state prisoners and the latter only applies to probationers.