Appellant entered a no-contest plea in exchange for informal probation. He indicated he understood that he could withdraw his plea if the court withdrew its approval of the plea agreement (Pen. Code, § 1192.5), and that he could receive up to three years and eight months in jail if he violated probation. Appellant later pled no contest to a subsequent charge and admitted multiple probation violations in exchange for a terminal sentence with credit for time served and that informal probation would be converted to formal probation without any additional consequences. The trial court did not advise appellant of his section 1192.5 rights, nor did appellant sign or initial a plea form indicating he understood and agreed to waive his rights under that section. Appellant then failed to appear at multiple sentencing hearings over the next five months. The trial court issued a bench warrant and appellant was subsequently arrested. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court terminated probation and imposed two years and eight months based on appellant’s failures to appear.
The Court of Appeal agreed with appellant that he is entitled to either withdrawal of the plea or specific performance of the plea because the sentence imposed by the trial court exceeded the terms of the operative plea agreement and he was not adequately advised of his section 1192.5 rights.
Appellant did not forfeit the issue by failing to move to withdraw his plea at the sentencing hearing, as the section 1192.5 advisement given in the first plea agreement was insufficient to advise appellant of his rights in the operative plea agreement as to the second case. The trial court was required to separately advise appellant of his section 1192.5 rights in each plea agreement.
When the trial court was no longer willing to honor the terms of the plea agreement, with no prior discussion about a specific sanction for nonappearance as to the operative plea agreement, the trial court was required to inform defendant he had the right to withdraw from the plea. (People v. Casillas (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 445, 451.)
The matter was remanded for further proceedings.