Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People v. Waldo Curtis Buscall

March 3, 2011

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
WALDO CURTIS BUSCALL, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.



(Super. Ct. No. NCR73170)

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hull ,j.

P. v. Buscall CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

In June 2008, defendant Waldo Curtis Buscall pleaded guilty to one count of selling or transporting marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11360, subd. (a)). In exchange, defendant received a four-year prison term, imposition of which was stayed; he was then ordered to serve three years of formal probation. Defendant subsequently violated his probation, his probation was revoked, and he was ordered to serve the previously stayed prison term. Defendant appeals from that order.

Finding no error, we affirm the court's order.

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

In January 2008, defendant was charged with selling or transporting marijuana in violation of Health and Safety Code, section 11360, subdivision (a). It was further alleged that within the prior five years, defendant served a prison term (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)).

Defendant pleaded guilty to the charge of selling or transporting marijuana. In exchange, the sentencing enhancements were dismissed. Defendant and the prosecution stipulated to a suspended sentence of four years in state prison, with defendant serving three years' formal probation.

Defendant's probation was imposed with the usual terms, but defendant and the prosecution agreed to additional terms as reported in the record: "[Defense counsel MR. MILLER:] There would be one additional proviso in that should any violation of the law at the misdemeanor grade or above would automatically trigger a commitment to the California Department of Corrections to serve out the four-year sentence.

"THE COURT: What about violations of probation?

"MR. MILLER: Those would be set--That violation of probation as set forth by the probation officer, such as a dirty test, or failure to test, or failure to report to the probation officer as directed.

"THE COURT: Counsel for the People, is that your agreement?

"MR. ROGERS: That is, your Honor, yes.

"THE COURT: Speaking to the Defendant, this is what's referred to as a plea bargain. I imagine you considered which--what the possibilities are, and in return for this agreement you would be allowed to be at liberty and on probation, with a guarantee that you do not serve any further time; however, with the disability or the liability that if you violate the law or ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.