Skip to content
Name: People v. Hahn
Case #: B279344
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 10/19/2017
Summary

Termination of probation does not affect a court’s power to enforce a prior lawful sentencing order when the jail sentence was not imposed as a term of probation. Several years after pleading guilty to drug possession, the trial court terminated Hahn’s probation as unsuccessful and ordered him to serve 120 days in jail. Notwithstanding his history of failing to appear in court, the court stayed the execution of the sentence to permit Hahn to apply for work furlough and gave him a date to report to jail. Hahn failed to comply with the court’s order and did not turn himself in. When he was arrested on a warrant a year later, Hahn objected to the court’s order for him to serve the jail sentence, arguing that because probation had been terminated, the court was without power to remand him. The court agreed, deleted the jail time, and discharged him from custody. The People appealed. Held: Reversed. “The court does not lose jurisdiction while a stay is in effect, even where the sentence has been entered in the minutes.” (People v. Gooch (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1004, 1007.) Because the execution of a judgment of conviction is the process of carrying the judgment into effect, a temporary stay of that execution does not deprive the court of the ability to enforce the judgment. The termination of probation in this case did not affect the court’s power to enforce its lawful orders. The jail sentence was not imposed as a term of probation. Rather, the court was only asked to enforce a prior lawful sentencing order. Hahn also waived the right to object to the trial court’s enforcement of the jail term given that he requested the sentence be stayed and then failed to appear as scheduled. Hahn should have been required to serve the 120-day sentence. The Court of Appeal remanded the matter to the trial court with directions to reinstate and execute the jail sentence.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B279344.PDF