After admitting a violation of probation and an Arbuckle waiver before Judge Cissna, appellant appeared for sentencing before Judge Neville, who ordered defendant released with conditions, expressed an intent to continue sentencing and refer the matter to probation and put defendant in some sort of program, although Judge Neville said he would not be the one to pick the program. Appellant was never released from county jail, and when Judge Cissna became aware of the order, he set the matter for sentencing and purported to sentence defendant to prison. The appellate court held that Judge Neville had exclusive jurisdiction regarding appellant’s sentencing, and Judge Cissna could not interfere with the exercise of that sentencing power.