Skip to content
Name: Wofford v. Superior Court (San Diego County)
Case #: D064633
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 10/22/2014
Summary

Defendant serving non-custodial portion of Realignment split sentence is eligible for transfer of supervision under Interstate Compact. Wofford was convicted of drug-related offenses and sentenced under the Realignment Act to a split term. After she commenced serving the supervised, non-custodial portion of her sentence, she applied for transfer of her supervision to Virginia. The prosecution opposed, stating Wofford was unlike a probationer, because she was serving a prison term in the community. The trial court found her ineligible for transfer because she was in essence an inmate and therefore not eligible under the Interstate Compact. The Court of Appeal deemed Wofford’s appeal a petition for writ of mandate. Held: Granted. The Interstate Compact is an agreement between member states which provides the mechanism by which adult offenders who are released into the community, including probationers and parolees, are transferred from one state to another for supervision. (Pen. Code, § 11180.) The Realignment Act of 2011 shifted responsibility for postrelease supervision of certain felons from the state to the county. When the trial court imposes a split sentence under the Act, the concluding portion of the term is suspended in execution, and the defendant is released from custody and is supervised in accordance with the terms and procedures generally applicable to probationers. (Pen. Code, § 1170, subd. (h)(5)(A), (B).) The “essential factors that bring an offender within the parameters of the Compact are (1) an adjudication of guilt, and (2) release from custodial status into the community under supervision.” A defendant serving the supervised release portion of a split sentence fits within these requirements and there is nothing in the Realignment Act which prohibits application of the Compact to such a defendant.