Skip to content
Name: People v. Davis
Case #: C040635
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 01/07/2003
Subsequent History: Rev. denied 4/9/03.

Since defendant was on probation on July 1, 2001, he was eligible for Proposition 36 drug treatment even though his conviction and initial grant of probation into drug treatment program predated its effective date. He violated probation in September 2001 by failing a drug test and failing to appear in drug court. These were part of defendant's drug treatment regimen and a drug-related condition of his probation under Proposition…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Superior Court (Martinez)
Case #: H023966
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 12/19/2002
Subsequent History: None

Joining all other reported decisions, the Sixth District holds that the washout period for a prior strike conviction in a proceeding under Proposition 36 (Pen. Code, sec. 1210.1, subd.(b)(1)) refers to the period immediately preceding the commission of the nonviolent drug possession offense, and not to the period after the date of release from…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Garcia
Case #: F039327
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 11/27/2002
Subsequent History: Rev. granted 2/11/03: S112688

Appellant pleaded guilty to possession of methamphetamine and misdemeanor driving under the influence of methamphetamine. On appeal, he challenged the trial court’s denial of his request to be placed on probation and ordered into treatment pursuant to the provisions of Proposition 36. The trial court denied appellant’s request because his driving under the influence conviction was a "misdemeanor not related to the use of drugs" within the meaning of section 1210.1, subdivision (b)(2). The appellate court here affirmed. The offense of driving under the influence of drugs is "not related" to drug use within the meaning…

View Full Summary
Name: Trumble v. Superior Court
Case #: D039990
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 11/22/2002
Subsequent History: Rev. granted 1/29/03

Appellant Trumble was arrested for driving under the influence and possession of controlled substances. On appeal, she challenged the trial court’s finding that the driving under the influence charge rendered her ineligible to participate in treatment under Proposition 36. The appellate court affirmed. The misdemeanor offense of driving under the influence of drugs involves more than the "simple possession or use of drugs" as defined by Penal Code section 1210.1, subdivision (b)(4). A contrary interpretation would be inconsistent with expressed intent of Prop 36 that it was strictly limited and affected only simple drug possession. Therefore,…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Walters
Case #: B158090
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 11/19/2002
Subsequent History: Rev. granted 1/22/03: S112291

Walters was arrested for driving under the influence, and arresting officers seized two bags of methamphetamine from his pocket. On appeal, Walters challenged the trial court’s finding that the driving under the influence charge rendered him ineligible to participate in treatment under Proposition 36. The appellate court affirmed. The misdemeanor offense of driving under the influence of drugs involves more than the "simple possession or use of drugs" as defined by Penal Code section 1210.1, subdivision (b)(4). It requires the additional element of impaired driving , and therefore disqualified Walters from participation in Proposition 36…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Barasa
Case #: D038830
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 10/30/2002
Subsequent History: 11/15/02: rehrg. denied; 1/22/03: review denied

Defendant was not statutorily eligible for probation under Proposition 36 where he was convicted of transportation of cocaine. Under the facts of the case, it was clear that appellant was selling cocaine where he handed a bag of a dozen bags totaling 41 grams of cocaine to a clerk while being followed by the police. The court rejected a construction of the statute which creates a new offense of "transportation for personal use." Moreover, appellant admitted he was selling…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Murillo
Case #: E030638
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 10/23/2002
Subsequent History: Order mod. opinion/no change in judgment 10/28/02. Rev. denied 1/15/03.

Appellant was originally sentenced to 36 months of probation and ordered into a Drug Court rehab program, following a conviction for possession of methamphetamine. She was found in violation of probation after testing positive, and was dropped from the drug court program. Following the violation she requested drug treatment pursuant to Proposition 36. The trial court denied the request and sentenced appellant to state prison, reasoning that appellant was not a viable candidate for Proposition 36 because of the failed drug court program, and also noting it had the discretion to revoke probation. The appellate court…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Ayele
Case #: D038700
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 10/18/2002
Subsequent History: Rev. granted 1/15/03:S111522

Appellant was convicted of possession of cocaine base, a felony, and resisting arrest, a misdemeanor. At sentencing, appellant moved that the court strike the misdemeanor so he could be granted diversion under Proposition 36. The court denied both the motions to strike and for diversion, and sentenced him to five years in state prison. The appellate court here affirmed. Appellant was ineligible for probation under Penal Code section 1210.1, subdivision (b)(2) because of the misdemeanor conviction which was not drug-related. Although the resistance to arrest may have been motivated by the drug possession,…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. DeLong
Case #: B152019
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 08/22/2002
Subsequent History: Review Denied November 13, 2002

Where a defendant successfully completes a drug program under Proposition 36, and fulfils probation conditions, resulting in the setting aside of the original drug conviction, he or she may still obtain appellate review of the underlying trial…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Canty
Case #: C039187
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 07/30/2002
Subsequent History: Rev. granted 10/16/02: S109537

The misdemeanor offense of driving under the influence of drugs renders one ineligible for treatment under Proposition 36, because it is an offense which does not involve the "simple possession or use of drugs." It requires the additional element of impaired…

View Full Summary