Skip to content
Name: People v. Bradshaw
Case #: F070137
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 04/27/2016

Trial court erred by not expressly considering defendant's eligibility for Proposition 36 drug treatment (Pen. Code, § 1210.1). In August 2014, appellant pleaded no contest to felony possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) and received probation with nine months in jail. The probation officer submitted a written recommendation (but not a formal report) stating that appellant was ineligible for Proposition 36 drug treatment and the court made no mention of such treatment at sentencing. On appeal, Bradshaw claimed the court erred in not ordering drug treatment pursuant to section 1210.1. Held: Reversed and remanded. Under…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Gutierrez
Case #: B264167
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 03/02/2016

Trial court may not incarcerate a defendant who violates his postrelease community supervision (PRCS) by committing a nonviolent drug possession offense (NVDP), without first determining whether he qualifies for Proposition 36 drug treatment. Gutierrez was on PRCS when he was arrested for being under the influence of methamphetamine. A petition was filed alleging a violation of his release terms. Initially, he had an informal administrative probable cause hearing before a probation officer regarding the petition, at which he declined to accept the suggested resolution of his alleged violation and refused to waive a hearing. He filed a motion to dismiss…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Hudson
Case #: C076512
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 02/19/2016

Trial court did not err by denying drug probation (Pen. Code, § 1210.1) based on its finding, by a preponderance of the evidence, that defendant possessed drugs for sale. A jury acquitted Hudson of possessing heroin, meth, and cocaine base for sale but found him guilty of the lesser included offenses of simple possession of each. At sentencing, the trial court found by a preponderance of the evidence that he possessed the drugs for sale, denied drug probation, and sentenced Hudson to county prison. Hudson appealed. Held: Affirmed. Section 1210.1 mandates drug probation—probation conditioned on participation in a drug treatment…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Harbison
Case #: B251492
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 10/21/2014

Where defendant has two prior failures in Proposition 36 drug treatment programs and is found unamenable to further treatment, trial court's discretion is limited to imposing 30 days in jail. Harbison was convicted of possessing methamphetamine. He had prior drug offenses, for which he had participated in several drug treatment programs. The trial court found him unamenable to further drug treatment under Proposition 36 (Pen. Code, § 1210.1), granted probation and imposed 120 days in jail. Harbison appealed, claiming the court was limited to imposing a 30-day jail sentence. Held: Reversed. Proposition 36, the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Juhasz
Case #: C068288
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 10/03/2013

A defendant's refusal of drug treatment in a prior case cannot be used to exclude him from a Proposition 36 program in a different case. Appellant pled no contest to possession of methamphetamine with a provision he would be granted probation and referred for drug treatment under Proposition 36. Based on two past unsuccessful attempts at treatment in prior cases, the probation department deemed appellant ineligible for Proposition 36 treatment, and the trial court found him unamenable to drug treatment in the present case. At sentencing, the court denied his request to be reinstated in the Proposition 36 program. Held:…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Zeigler
Case #: H036573
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 11/30/2012

In considering an application for a certificate of rehabilitation pursuant to Penal Code section 4852.01 et seq., the underlying conduct of an offense dismissed pursuant to Penal Code section 1210.1 is to be considered. Appellant petitioned for a certificate of rehabilitation for two prior drug convictions, one in 1989 and one in 2000. Over the prosecution's objection, the trial court ruled that it had no discretion to consider evidence of the conduct underlying appellant's 2007 drug offense for which he was granted and successfully completed Proposition 36 probation, and granted the certificate. Reversed. Section 4852.01 et seq.…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Barros
Case #: A132148
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 10/16/2012

Where a trial court finds offenses were improperly joined and severs a disqualifying offense, the defendant has not been convicted of a nondrug-related felony and therefore merits Proposition 36 probation. Appellant was charged with violation of a restraining order and possession of prohibited drugs. After arraignment, the trial court granted his motion to sever the charges. He was convicted of a misdemeanor violation of a restraining order and pled guilty to felony drug possession. When sentenced for the drug offenses, he was denied Proposition 36 probation because the court found the nondrug misdemeanor was part of the "same proceeding," rendering…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Parodi
Case #: A130758
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 08/30/2011

Bringing drugs into a jail is not a "nonviolent drug possession offense" for purposes of Proposition 36. Appellant was arrested for possession of illegal drugs. Before entering the jail, he was asked if he had anything on his person he did not want to bring in -- he answered "no." A sign at the jail entry warned it was a criminal offense to enter with contraband. Drugs were found on appellant. He pled guilty to bringing drugs into the jail (Pen. Code, §4573). At sentencing he was denied drug treatment after the trial court found the offense was not a…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Bauer
Case #: F059737
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 03/08/2011

The court has discretion to terminate Proposition 36 probation when a defendant makes no effort to comply with drug treatment, thereby implying a refusal of drug treatment as a condition of probation. After pleading guilty to possession of heroin and admitting three prior prison term enhancements, appellant was granted Proposition 36 probation for three years. Within two months a petition for violation of probation was filed alleging failure to report to the probation officer, failure to complete treatment, failure to register, and failure to complete AIDS education. He admitted the allegations and was reinstated on Proposition 36 probation. About a…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Friedeck
Case #: B213944
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 04/08/2010

A defendant's refusal to undergo drug treatment as a condition of deferred entry of judgment (DEJ) makes him ineligible for Prop. 36 probation. After pleading guilty to possession of Percocet, the court placed appellant on DEJ and ordered him to undergo drug counseling. A DEJ violation alleged appellant was arrested for being under the influence. It further alleged appellant would not be eligible for Prop. 36 probation because there was no evidence of enrollment in drug treatment. Appellant admitted being in violation of the DEJ order and was sentenced to prison. At a subsequent credits…

View Full Summary