WPC  >~h#%@.Hu@^f?}ݟC L,hoU2tDn:0Z4.(W!͜$ MHz͉余,aR+v)!k7"–#O 7x*CC~:ެlN8oJGUa<]t`ptbCes"~H^b$[Z^E}U/>lM/k'6YvJr춷x|²Q4׬!ǝJ^Z3@0hj-RiC*9xᝏb1P+q|F8.tgVe0 \3VO`}n~/ BZII[(@{_ply3yr,|8-u Z,S# cw#U NK % 0Y U 8 w0 44 H W mY Np U@r 0t U:& 1u` b   72 0  P 0thT $0 LT H > 8& H^ r \ (t 2 4 ` lb 01 0 6/ le, 0IN,Kw  HH'Do 0: 0Dr::4*4^DDnnXXN$$..0J0z\\ 0Abhh ,s,22h/  T h 1{{ 0c 1eeeeeeeeeee 0/T 0Dh@ @ @ @ @ @ b ^ \\NTFDAP\Jomo,,,,0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX(1$vOXXUSUS.,8 {AZ Arial Black }6/athryn3|xU(9 Z(Times New Roman (L2$ !{XXUSUS.,  <6X9`("Courier 10cpi3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)- -Gkli)TABLE OF AUTHORITIES PROBATION(L2$ !{XXUSUS.,   J  #"Xd# r A. IntroductionB. Absolute Statutory IneligibilityC. Presumptive IneligibilityD. Procedure at SentencingE. Probation ConditionsF. Restitution/Cost of ProbationG. Conviction Set Aside upon Completion of Probation VIOLATION AND REVOCATION OF PROBATIONA. Introduction2B. Due Process Rights C. Evidentiary IssuesD. Revocation for Failure to Pay RestitutionE. Sentencing Upon A Finding of Probation Violation0.NormalF. Appeals and WaiverG. Pre-Sentence CreditsH. Waiver of Pre-Sentence Credits (Johnson Waivers)TABLE OF AUTHORITIES (O$TABLE OF AUTHORITIES PROBATIONPROBATIONA. IntroductionA. IntroductionB. Absolute Statutory IneligibilityB. Absolute Statutory IneligibilityC. Presumptive Ineligibility42Emphasis6&)4Hyperlink            C. Presumptive IneligibilityD. Procedure at SentencingD. Procedure at SentencingE. Probation ConditionsE. Probation ConditionsF. Restitution/Cost of ProbationF. Restitution/Cost of ProbationG. Conviction Set Aside upon Completion of ProbationG. Conviction Set Aside upon Completion of Probation VIOLATION AND REVOCATION OF PROBATION VIOLATION AND REVOCATION OF PROBATIONA. Introduction2A. Introduction2B. Due Process Rights B. Due Process Rights C. Evidentiary IssuesC. Evidentiary IssuesD. Revocation for Failure to Pay RestitutionD. Revocation for Failure to Pay Restitution(Vm$0   E. Sentencing Upon A Finding of Probation ViolationE. Sentencing Upon A Finding of Probation ViolationF. Appeals and WaiverF. Appeals and WaiverG. Pre-Sentence CreditsG. Pre-Sentence CreditsH. Waiver of Pre-Sentence Credits (Johnson Waivers)StarPageciteas((Cite as: 7 Cal.4th 1144, *1159)SDU_32H. Waiver of Pre-Sentence Credits (Johnson Waivers)(CEKQW]cioAutoList1A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.(;3$2#  0  .3  0  (CEKQW]cioAutoList2A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.(,!$0  0` (#(#  (@$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# ` - -JJ/ !{XXUSUS.,  _  {uOVERVIEWOFPROBATIONAND   PROBATIONREVOCATIONLAW b  uRevisedandUpdated & by V KathrynSeligman,KimberlyFitzgerald,andGabrielTames 6 October2003 f FIRSTDISTRICTAPPELLATEPROJECT (V# 730HarrisonStreet,Suite201 6)$  SanFrancisco,California94107 f*%! 4154953119 +&"  ,(#   TRX3'*FDAP Large Mailing LabelX3' Letter3'*FDAP Large Mailing LabelLabel3'LetterT    {8{dd8TABLEOFCONTENTS  9  Page(s)     4( )O  5  TABLEOFAUTHORITIES6)O.  7 |\!!F(#.||4* !)O  5  Ԅiii6)O  7 (#0Ԉ  te  GVm  GVm0     4+ )O  5  PROBATION6)O0  7 ^#,","H(#. (#(##4, ,")O  5  Ԅ16)O  7 (#/GVm݌   Ќ  k!  k!0  0` (#(#    4- )O  5  A.0` ` (#` (#Introduction65 )OI   7 w #,","H(#. ` (#` (##4. ,")O  5  Ԅ16 )O3   7 (#a k!݌   Ќ  k!  k! 0  0` (#(#    4/ )O  5  B.0` ` (#` (#AbsoluteStatutoryIneligibility6g )O{   7  #,","H(#.4` (#` (##40 ,")O  5  Ԅ16e )Oy   7 (# k!  ݌   Ќ     `     h      p   k!  k! 0  0` (#(#    41 )O  5  C.0` ` (#` (#PresumptiveIneligibility6)O-  7 [#,","H(#.-` (#` (##44 ,")O  5  Ԅ26)O$  7 (#Rk! ݌   Ќ  k!  k!0  0` (#(#    45 )O  5  D.0` ` (#` (#ProcedureatSentencing6X)Ol  7 #,","H(#.+` (#` (##46 ,")O  5  Ԅ36O)Oc  7 (#k!݌   Ќ  l  l20  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.0 (# (#ProbationReport#,","H(#.) (# (##3l2M݌  Ќ  l  l20  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.0 (# (#StatementofReasonsWhenProbationDenied#,","H(#.ddC (# (##5l2M݌  Ќ  l  lL0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   3.0 (# (#ChallengingtheDenialofProbationonAppeal:AbuseofDiscretion  #,","H(#.  (# (##5lLg݌  Ќ  k!  k!0  0` (#(#    47 )O  5  E.0` ` (#` (#ProbationConditions6)O  7 <#,","H(#.(` (#` (##48 ,")O  5  Ԅ56)O  7 (#.k!݌  Ќ  l  l0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.0 (# (#Conditions#,","H(#.ll# (# (##5l݌  Ќ  l  l0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.0 (# (#ConditionsAffectingConstitutionalRights#,","H(#.JJC (# (##8l݌  Ќ  l  l0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   3.0 (# (#JailTermasaConditionofProbation#,","H(#.ll> (# (##9l݌ ! Ќ  l  l0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   4.0 (# (#AppealingImpositionofProbationCondition/Waiver#!!G(#.K (# (##10l݌ # Ќ  k!  k!0  0` (#(#    49 )O  5  F.0` ` (#` (#Restitution/CostofProbation6)O  7 F#!!G(#.FF1` (#` (##4: !)O  5  Ԅ116{)O  7 "Ԅk!6݌ % ! Ќ  k!  k!_0  0` (#(#    4; )O  5  G.0` ` (#` (#ConvictionSetAsideuponCompletionofProbation6)O  7 #!!G(#.E` (#` (##4< !)O  5  Ԅ126)O6  7n(# k!_z݌ '"# Ќ  GVm  GVm 0     4= )O  5  VIOLATIONANDREVOCATIONOFPROBATION6!)O!6  7ndJ!#!!G(#.dd/(#(##4> !)O  5  Ԅ136!)O "6  7n(#7"GVm ݌ )$% Ќ  k!  k!"0  0` (#(#    4? )O  5  A.0` ` (#` (#Introduction6>#)OR#6  7n ##!!G(#. !` (#` (##4@ !)O  5  Ԅ136)$)O=$6  7n(#k$k!""݌ +&' Ќ   ,'( k!  k!!%0  0` (#(#    4A )O  5  B.0` ` (#` (#DueProcessRights6%)O%6  7n%#!!G(#.&` (#` (##4B !)O  5  Ԅ136v&)O&6  7n(#&k!!%<%݌  Ќ  l  lZ'0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.0 (# (#Background#!!G(#.# (# (##13lZ'u'݌  Ќ  l  lU(0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.0 (# (#Writtennotice#!!G(#.' (# (##14lU(p(݌  Ќ  l  lT)0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   3.0 (# (#Motionforrevocation#!!G(#.... (# (##15lT)o)݌   Ќ  l  lZ*0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   4.0 (# (#Waiver#!!G(#.22 (# (##15lZ*u*݌   Ќ  l  lQ+0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   5.0 (# (#SummaryRevocation#!!G(#.+ (# (##16lQ+l+݌   Ќ  l  lT,0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   6.0 (# (#RighttoCounsel#!!G(#.pp) (# (##16lT,o,݌   Ќ  l  lU-0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   7.0 (# (#StandardofProof/Review#!!G(#.1 (# (##17lU-p-݌  Ќ  k!  k!^.0  0` (#(#    4Cn)O  5  C.0` ` (#` (#EvidentiaryIssues6.)O.6  7n/#!!G(#.&` (#` (##4Dn!)O  5  Ԅ186/)O/6  7n(#/k!^.y.݌  Ќ  l  l00  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.0 (# (#Hearsay#!!G(#.vv (# (##18l00݌  Ќ  l  l10  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.0 (# (#ExclusionaryRule#!!G(#.* (# (##20l11݌  Ќ  l  l20  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   3.0 (# (#Probationerstestimony#!!G(#.0 (# (##20l22݌  Ќ  l  l30  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   4.0 (# (#CollateralEstoppel#!!G(#.66, (# (##21l33݌  Ќ  k!  k!40  0` (#(#    4E)O  5  D.0` ` (#` (#RevocationforFailuretoPayRestitution65)O5  7BG5#!!G(#.BB=` (#` (##4F!)O  5  Ԅ216 6)O!6  7(#O6k!44݌  Ќ  k!  k!60  0` (#(#    4H)O  5  E. ` SentencingUponAFindingofProbationViolation6V7)Oj7  77#!!G(#.D` (#` (##4I!)O  5  Ԅ226\8)Op8  7(#8k!6 7݌   Ќ  l  l@90  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.0 (# (#OriginalSentenceImposed,NotExecuted(ExecutionofSentence " Suspended:ESS)#!!G(#.( (# (##22l@9[9݌ # Ќ  l  l:0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.0 (# (#OriginalSentenceNotImposed(ImpositionofSentenceSuspended: %!! _ISS_)#!!G(#.8 8  (# (##23l::݌ &"" Ќ  k!  k!;0  0` (#(#    4J)O  5  F.0` ` (#` (#AppealsandWaiver6c<)Ow<  7B<#!!G(#.BB&` (#` (##4K!)O  5  Ԅ246S=)Og=  7(#=k!;<݌ ($$ Ќ  l  l7>0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.0 (# (#ObjectionstoDiscretionarySentencingChoicesWaivedbyFailure *&& toObject#!!G(#." (# (##24l7>R>݌ +'' Ќ   ,(( l  l?0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.0 (# (#UnauthorizedSentencingErrorsNotWaived#!!G(#.B (# (##26l??݌  Ќ  k!  k!@0  0` (#(#    4L)O  5  G.0` ` (#` (#PreSentenceCredits6A)O-A  7z[A#!!G(#.zz(` (#` (##4M!)O  5  Ԅ266 B)OB  7(#MBk!@@݌  Ќ  k!  k!B0  0` (#(#    4N)O  5  H.0` ` (#` (#WaiverofPreSentenceCredits(JohnsonWaivers)6TC)OhC  7C#!!G(#.D` (#` (##4R!)O  5  Ԅ276hD)O|D  7(#Dk!B C݌  Ќ  _# {E#{@*_Ԉ      %  TABLEOFAUTHORITIES       FEDERALCASES      2%#X_Gagnon_Ԁv._Scarpelli_(1973)    X 2%#2%#411U.S.778@%#.| | 12,13,15    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#X_Morrissey_Ԁv._Brewster_(1972)    X 2%#2%#408U.S.471@%#.| | 12,13,15     X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XUnitedStatesv.Hamilton(9thCir.1983)    X 2%#2%#708F.2d1412M"M"H%#. 14    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XUnitedStatesv.Tyler(5thCir.1979)    X 2%#2%#605F.2d851M"M"H%#. 14   X?+ ` hp x 2%#?  STATECASES      2%#XInreAngelE.(1986)   X 2%#2%#177_Cal.App_.3d415M"M"H%#. !19   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XInreAngelJ.(1992)   X 2%#2%#9_Cal.App_.4th1096""I%#. !7   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XInre_Beal_(1975)   X 2%#2%#46_Cal.App_.3d94""I%#.  4   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XInreJustinS.(2001)    X 2%#2%#93_Cal.App_.4th811""I%#. !9 !  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XInreLaCroix(1974) #  X 2%#2%#12Cal.3d146M"M"H%#. 14 $   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XInreMoss(1985) &!"  X 2%#2%#175_Cal.App_.3d913M"M"H%#. !13 '"#  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XInreWhite(1979) )$%  X 2%#2%#97_Cal.App_.3d141!!G(#.t t 7,9 *%&  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? ,'(  2%#X_Lucido_Ԁv.SuperiorCourt(1990)   X 2%#2%#51Cal.3d335M"M"H%#. 18   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Ambrose(1992)   X 2%#2%#7_Cal.App_.4th1917 ! !D%#. !23,24   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Arreola_(1994)    X 2%#2%#7Cal.4th1144 ! !D%#.  16,17    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Bailey(1983)    X 2%#2%#140_Cal.App_.3d828""I%#. !8    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Balestra_(1999)    X 2%#2%#76_Cal.App_.4th57""I%#.D D 6    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Barkins_(1978)   X 2%#2%#81_Cal.App_.3d30M"M"H%#.  14   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Bautista(1998)   X 2%#2%#63_Cal.App_.4th865 ! !D%#. !22,23   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Beach(1983)   X 2%#2%#147_Cal.App_.3d612!!F%#. !6,7   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Betterton_(1979)   X 2%#2%#93_Cal.App_.3d406""I%#.t t 4   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Birkett(1999)   X 2%#2%#21Cal.4th226""I%#.  5    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Blackburn(1999) "  X 2%#2%#72_Cal.App_.4th1520M"M"H%#."10 #  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Bohannon_(2000) %!!  X 2%#2%#82_Cal.App_.4th798!!F%#. !3,4 &""  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Bolton(1979) ($$  X 2%#2%#23Cal.3d208""I%#. 5 )%%  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Bradley(1967) +''  X 2%#2%#248_Cal.App_.2d887 ! !D%#. !10,11 ,((  X 2%#2%#Peoplev._Brasley_(1974)   X 2%#2%#41_Cal.App_.3d311""I%#.t t 8   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Brewster_(1986)   X 2%#2%#184_Cal.App_.3d921""I%#. !4   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Buford_(1974)    X 2%#2%#42_Cal.App_.3d975M"M"H%#.t t 13    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Burks(1998)    X 2%#2%#66_Cal.App_.4th232""H(#. !24    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Butler(1980)    X 2%#2%#107_Cal.App_.3d251""I%#. !4    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Carbajal_(1995)   X 2%#2%#10Cal.4th1114!!F%#.r r 1,6   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Colado_(1995)   X 2%#2%#32_Cal.App_.4th260M"M"H%#. !20   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Coleman(1975)   X 2%#2%#13Cal.3d867 ! !D%#. 15,18   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Cotton(1991)   X 2%#2%#230_Cal.App_.3d1072M"M"H%#.LL"21   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Cromer_(2000)   X 2%#2%#24Cal.4th889""I%#.  8    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Dale(1973) "  X 2%#2%#36_Cal.App_.3d191M"M"H%#.t t 14 #  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Delvalle_(1994) %!!  X 2%#2%#26_Cal.App_.4th869""I%#. !6 &""  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Dorsch_(1992) ($$  X 2%#2%#3_Cal.App_.4th1346""I%#. !3 )%%  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Felix(1986) +''  X 2%#2%#178_Cal.App_.3d1168M"M"H%#.LL"13 ,((  X 2%#2%#Peoplev._Fritchey_(1992)   X 2%#2%#2_Cal.App_.4th829""I%#.D D 6   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Gardiner(2000)   X 2%#2%#79_Cal.App_.4th148""I%#. !9   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Goldberg(1983)    X 2%#2%#148_Cal.App_.3d1160M"M"H%#.LL"20    XPeoplev.Gonzalez(2003)   Ѐ31Cal.4th745P"P"I(#. #22   ?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Hackler_(1993)    X 2%#2%#13_Cal.App_.4th1049""I%#."6    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Hall(2002)   X 2%#2%#103_Cal.App_.4th889M"M"H%#."10   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Harris(1989)   X 2%#2%#195_Cal.App_.3d717M"M"H%#. !24   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Harris(1991)   X 2%#2%#226_Cal.App_.3d141 ! !D%#. !20,21   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Harrison(1988)   X 2%#2%#199_Cal.App_.3d803M"M"H%#. !18   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Hodgkin(1987)   X 2%#2%#194_Cal.App_.3d795""I%#. !8    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Howard(1997) "  X 2%#2%#16Cal.4th1081M"M"H%#.r r 20 #  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Jasper(1983) %!!  X 2%#2%#33Cal.3d931M"M"H%#. 19 &""  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Johnson(2002) ($$  X 2%#2%#28Cal.4th1050 ! !D%#. 23,24 )%%  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Johnson(1978) +''  X 2%#2%#82_Cal.App_.3d183u!u!E%#.t t 8,23 ,((  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Johnson(1980)   X 2%#2%#26Cal.3d557M"M"H%#. 16   X 2%#2%#Peoplev.Kelley(1997)   X 2%#2%#52_Cal.App_.4th568M"M"H%#. !22   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Langevin_(1984)    X 2%#2%#155_Cal.App_.3d520""I%#. !5    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Latham_(1988)    X 2%#2%#206_Cal.App_.3d27M"M"H%#.t t 20    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Lent(1975)    X 2%#2%#15Cal.3d481""I%#. 6    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Lesnick_(1987)   X 2%#2%#189_Cal.App_.3d637""I%#. !5   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Lindsay(1992)   X 2%#2%#10_Cal.App_.4th1642""I%#."6   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.LoCicero(1969)   X 2%#2%#71Cal.2d1186""I%#.6 6 2   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Lopez(1998)   X 2%#2%#66_Cal.App_.4th615""I%#. !7   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Maki_(1985)   X 2%#2%#39Cal.3d707 ! !D%#. 16,17    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Mancebo_, "  X 2%#2%#27Cal.4th735M"M"H%#.  23 #  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._McDowell_(1976) %!!  X 2%#2%#59_Cal.App_.3d807""I%#.t t 6 &""  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Medina(2001) ($$  X 2%#2%#89_Cal.App_.4th318M"M"H%#. !20 )%%  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Middleton_(1997) +''  X 2%#2%#52_Cal.App_.4th19M"M"H%#.D D 22 ,((  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Miller(1989)   X 2%#2%#208_Cal.App_.3d1311!!F%#.LL"7,9   X 2%#2%#Peoplev._Mobley_(1983)   X 2%#2%#139_Cal.App_.3d320""I%#. !4   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Molina(1977)    X 2%#2%#74_Cal.App_.3d544""I%#.t t 5    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Mosley_(1988)    X 2%#2%#198_Cal.App_.3d1167M"M"H%#.LL"13    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.O'Connell(2003)    X 2%#2%#107_Cal.App_.4th1062 ! !D%#.#10,17    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Otto(2001)   X 2%#2%#26Cal.4th200""I%#.  4   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Pipitone_(1984)   X 2%#2%#152_Cal.App_.3d1112M"M"H%#.LL"14   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Pointer(1984)   X 2%#2%#151_Cal.App_.3d1128""I%#.LL"7   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Preyer_(1985)   X 2%#2%#164_Cal.App_.3d568M"M"H%#. !19   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Rodriguez(1990)   X 2%#2%#51Cal.3d437M"M"H%#. 16    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Salazar(1980) "  X 2%#2%#108_Cal.App_.3d992""I%#. !4 #  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Salazar(1994) %!!  X 2%#2%#29_Cal.App_.4th1550M"M"H%#."24 &""  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Scott(1994) ($$  X 2%#2%#9Cal.4th331U U B%#. 5,2123 )%%  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Scroggins_(1987) +''  X 2%#2%#191_Cal.App_.3d502""I%#. !1 ,((  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.SuperiorCourt(Dorsey)   X 2%#2%#(1996)50_Cal.App_.4th1216M"M"H%#.)22   X 2%#2%#Peoplev._Tapia_(2000)   X 2%#2%#91_Cal.App_.4th738M"M"H%#. !15   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Tillman_(2000)    X 2%#2%#22Cal.4th300M"M"H%#.  22    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Vasquez(2001)    X 2%#2%#25Cal.4th1225M"M"H%#.r r 11    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Vickers(1972)    X 2%#2%#8Cal.3d451@%#.^ ^ 12,13,15    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Villines_(1987)   X 2%#2%#192_Cal.App_.3d1298 ! !D%#.LL"14,18   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Wardlow_(1991)   X 2%#2%#227_Cal.App_.3d360""I%#. !7   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Washington(1987)   X 2%#2%#192_Cal.App_.3d1120M"M"H%#.LL"18   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Welch(1993)   X 2%#2%#5Cal.4th228!!F%#. 4,9   X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.White(1982)   X 2%#2%#133_Cal.App_.3d677M"M"H%#. !20    X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Winson_(1981) "  X 2%#2%#29Cal.3d711M"M"H%#. 17 #  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Zarig_(1992) %!!  X 2%#2%#8_Cal.App_.4th362""I%#.D D 5 &""  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Zimmerman(1979) ($$  X 2%#2%#100_Cal.App_.3d673M"M"H%#. !18 )%%  X?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev._Zuniga_(1996) +''  X 2%#2%#46_Cal.App_.4th81-!-!E%#.D D 2123 ,((  X?+ ` hp x 2%#?  DOCKETEDCASES      2%#XPeoplev.Arnold,S106444M"M"H%#. #24  ?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Burroughs,S116659M"M"H%#.&24   ?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#XPeoplev.Jeffrey,S105978M"M"H%#. $24   ?+ ` hp x 2%#?  STATESTATUTES        2%#X RulesofCourt    Rule4.413""I%#.dd2   Rule4.414""J(#.dd3  Rule4.435 ! !E(#.dd19,20  ?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#X PenalCode   ?+ ` hp x 2%#?19.2x!x!F(#.8,23  186.22""J(#. @ 8  ?+ ` hp x X?462!!G(#.2,3   2%#X653""I%#.2  ?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#X667!!F%#.1,2 ! ?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#X1170!!F%#.1,4 # ?+ ` hp x 2%#? 2%#X1191""I%#.3 % ! ?+ ` hp x 2%#?1202""J(#. @` 9 '"# ?+ ` hp x X?1203ll3(#.13,5,8,1012,14,19 )$% ?+ ` hp x X? 2%#X1237M"M"H%#.19 +&'  ,'( 1538M"M"H%#.18  2900.5M"M"H%#.23  ?+ ` hp x 2%#?4532!!G(#.2,3  12022.6""J(#. @` 1   ?+ ` hp x X?12311""J(#.nn2   #{E#       {   `  @^^&   %  PROBATION   Ԉ    %  A.0  Introduction  m(#(#   PenalCodeSection1203permitsthetrialcourttograntprobationtoaconvicted   defendantbysuspendingtheimpositionorexecutionofsentenceandorderinga   "conditionalandrevocablereleaseinthecommunityunderthesupervisionofaprobation   officer."(Pen.Code,1203,_subd_.(a).)Theprimarypurposeofprobationisthe   defendantsrehabilitation.(Peoplev._Scroggins_(1987)191_Cal.App_.3d502,505;   Peoplev._Carbajal_(1995)10Cal.4th1114,1120.)  %  ! ! `(83  "Z3"  Z3~2  B  .3  0    AbsoluteStatutoryIneligibility  qZ3~݌(#(# Ќ    Thecommissionofenumeratedcrimesmakesadefendantstatutorilyineligiblefor  probation.(Pen.Code,667,_subd_._(c_)(4)[priorviolentorseriousfelonyconviction];  667.61,_subd_.(h)[enumeratedsexcrimes];1170.12,_subd_.(a)(4)[priorstrike!violentor  seriousfelonyconviction];1203,_subd_.(k)[commissionofaviolentorseriousfelony  whileonprobation];1203.044,_subd_.(b)[theftofover$50,000inasingletransaction   withapriorfelonyconvictioninwhich12022.6excessivetakingenhancementwas " found];1203.055,_subd_._(c_)[enumeratedcrimesonpublictransitvehicle,withprior $  convictionunderthesamesection];1203.06,_subd_.(a)[useoffirearminviolentcrimes]; &!" 1203.065,_subd_.(a)[enumeratedsexcrimes];1203.066,_subd_.(a)[lewdactswithchild]; (#$ 1203.07,_subd_.(a)[enumeratedcontrolledsubstancesviolations],1203.075,_subd_.(a) *%& [intentionalinflictionofgreatbodilyinjuryintheattemptedcommissionofviolent ,'( crimes];1203.08,_subd_.(a)[priorconvictionsofdesignatedfelonieswithina10year  period];1203.085,_subd_.(a)[convictionforoffensespunishablebyimprisonmentinstate  prisonwhileonparolefromviolentorseriousfelony]&_subd_Ԁ(b)[convictionforviolent  felonywhileonparolefromstateprison];1203.09[offensesagainstagedand   handicapped];12311[destructivedevices].)     Foreachoftheseoffenses,withthreeexceptions,statutorysubdivisionsrequire   thattheexistenceofthefactmakingthedefendantineligibleforprobationbeallegedin   theaccusatorypleading,andeitheradmittedbythedefendantinopencourt,orfoundto  betruebythejuryorjudge.(SeealsoPeoplev.LoCicero(1969)71Cal.2d1186,1192  93.)However,PenalCodesections667.61,_subd_.(h),1203,_subd_.(k),and1203.065,_subd_.  (a)donothavethisrequirement.    %  C.PresumptiveIneligibility      Thereisaseparategroupofoffensesforwhichprobationmaybegrantedonly"in  unusualcircumstanceswheretheinterestsofjusticewouldbestbeservedifthepersonis  grantedprobation."(Pen.Code,462[certainburglaries];1203,_subd_.(e)[enumerated   crimesinvolvinguseofweapons,inflictionofgreatbodilyinjury,twoormoreprior " convictions];1203.045[theftofamountexceeding$100,000];1203.046,_subd_.(a) $  [inducingaminortocommitaviolationof653];1203.048[computercrimesinexcess &"" of$100,000];1203.049[foodstampfraudexceeding$100,000];1203.065,_subd_.(b) ($$  [enumeratedsexoffenses];1203.073,_subd_.(b)1203.074[controlledsubstances]; *&& 1203.09,_subd_.(f)[enumeratedcrimesagainstvictimsatleast60yearsold];4532,_subd_.  _(c_)(1)[escapefromjail,courtorwhiletravelingbetweenthetwo].)   ,     TheRulesofCourtlistcertainfactorsthatmayindicatetheexistenceofunusual  circumstanceswarrantingprobationeligibilityforsuchoffenses.(RulesofCourt,rule   4.413.)However,evenifunusualcircumstancesarefoundandadefendantisdeemed   eligibleforprobation,he/shemaystillbefoundunsuitableforprobation.TheRulesof   Courtalsolistthecriteriatobeconsideredindeterminingwhetheraneligibledefendantis   suitableforprobation.(RulesofCourt,rule4.414.)    PenalCodesections1203.045,1203.048,_subd_.(a),1203.049,and1203.073  containstatutorysubdivisionswhichrequirethattheexistenceofthefactmakingthe  defendantpresumptivelyineligibleforprobationbeallegedintheaccusatorypleading,  andeitheradmittedbythedefendantinopencourt,orfoundtobetruebythejuryor  judge.PenalCodeSections462,1203,_subd_.(e),1203.046,_subd_.(a),1203.065,_subd_.  (b),1203.074,1203.09and4532,_subd_._(c_)(1)donotcontainthesepleadingrequirements.  AccordingtotheFirstDistrictinPeoplev._Dorsch_(1992)3_Cal.App_.4th1346,134951,   whennotstatutorilyrequired, sentencingfactorsthatmakedefendantspresumptively " ineligibleforprobationneednotbeallegedandpleaded. $    %  D.0  ProcedureatSentencing  &""(#(#    1.ProbationReport  / ($$   Inanycaseinvolvingafelonyforwhichthedefendantiseligibleforprobation,the *&& courtmustreferthemattertotheprobationofficertomakeawrittenprobationreport ,(( "includinghisorherrecommendationsastothegrantingordenyingofprobationandthe  conditionsofprobation,ifgranted."(Pen.Code,1191and1203,_subd_.(b)(2)(A);  Peoplev._Bohannon_(2000)82_Cal.App_.4th798,808.)Incasesinvolvingmisdemeanor  convictions,thecourtinitsdiscretionmayproceedtosentencingwithoutaprobation   report.(Pen.Code,1203,_subd_.(d)and1203b.)     Theprobationreportmustbemadeavailabletothedefendantatleastfivedays   beforesentencingforfelonyconvictions.(Pen.Code,1203,_subd_.(b)(2)(D).)Thereport   mustbeprovidedtothemisdemeanordefendantatleasttwodaysbeforesentencing.(Pen.  Code1203d.)Uponthedefendantsrequest,thereportmustbemadeavailableearlier  thanthestatutoryminimum(ninedayspriortosentencingforfeloniesandfivedaysprior  tosentencingformisdemeanors).Atrialcourtsfailuretograntarequestedcontinuance  Єwhendefendanthasnotreceivedtheprobationreportbythestatutorydeadlinehas  beenheldtorenderthesentencing fundamentallyunfair,requiringaremandfor  _resentencing_Ԁwithoutinquiringintothequestionofprejudice.(Peoplev._Bohannon_,  supra,82_Cal.App_.4thatp.809.)     Hearsayevidencemaybeincludedintheprobationreport.(Peoplev._Betterton_ " (1979)93_Cal.App_.3d406,414;Peoplev.Otto(2001)26Cal.4th200,212).Illegally $  seizedevidencemaybeconsideredaswell.(Peoplev._Brewster_(1986)184_Cal.App_.3d &"" 921,92829). ($$   Objectionstothecontentsoftheprobationreportmustberaisedatsentencingor *&& theyarewaivedforpurposesofappeal.(Peoplev.Welch(1993)5Cal.4th228.) ,((   Adefendanthastherighttochallengefactualassertionsintheprobationreportby  callingwitnessesandproducingevidence.(Pen.Code,1170,_subd_.(b);Inre_Beal_  (1975)46_Cal.App_.3d94,99;).     2.StatementofReasonsWhenProbationDenied       Thedecisiontodenyprobationisasentencingchoiceforwhichthetrialcourt   muststatereasonsontherecord.(Pen.Code,1170,_subd_._(c_);Peoplev._Mobley_Ԁ(1983)   139_Cal.App_.3d320,324;Peoplev.Salazar(1980)108_Cal.App_.3d992,1000.)   However,aseparatestatementofreasonsfordenyingprobationisnotrequiredifthe  defendantissentencedtotheuppertermandanadequatereasonisgivenforaggravation.  (Peoplev.Butler(1980)107_Cal.App_.3d251,25455.)    Norisastatementofreasonsfordenyingprobationrequiredifthecrimeisone  whichmakesthedefendantineligibleforprobationexceptinunusualcircumstances.  (Peoplev._Langevin_(1984)155_Cal.App_.3d520,523;Peoplev._Lesnick_(1987)189  _Cal.App_.3d637,644.)Thecourtin_Lesnick_stated, itwouldbeillogicalindeedto  requireatrialcourttosetforthreasonsfordoingsomethingwhichismandatedbystatute   absentcertainfindings.(Ibid.) " B.` hp x (#XB  Anobjectiontothetrialcourtsfailuretoproperlymakeorarticulatereasonsfor $  itsdiscretionarysentencingchoicesB.` hp x (#XBӀmustberaisedatsentencingortheissueiswaivedfor &"" purposesofappeal.(Peoplev.Scott(1994)9Cal.4th331,353357.) ($$  ,(( Ї   3.ChallengingtheDenialofProbationonAppeal:AbuseofDiscretion      Thetrialcourtsdenialofprobationisreviewedforabuseofdiscretion.The  appellatecourthasfoundanabuseofdiscretiononlywhenthetrialcourthasreliedona   blatantlyimproperfactor.(See,e.g.Peoplev.Bolton(1979)23Cal.3d208[defendant   hadseveralchildrenbornoutofwedlock];Peoplev._Zarig_(1992)8_Cal.App_.4th362,   375379[defendantwas20minuteslatetoamodificationhearing];Peoplev.Molina   (1977)74_Cal.App_.3d544,552553[courtexpresslyconcludesthatdefendanthadnot  beenadequatelypunishedforpastcrimes].)    Ofcourse,anargumentthatthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretionindenying  probationiswaivedunlessthedefenseobjectedatsentencing.(Peoplev.Scott,supra,9  Cal.4thatp.353.)# {# {     %  E.0  ProbationConditions  (#(#    1.Conditions      Atrialcourthasbroaddiscretiontoprescribeconditionsofprobationsolongas   theconditionsservethepurposesoftheprobationstatute.(Pen.Code1203.1,_subd_.(j); " Peoplev.Birkett(1999)21Cal.4th226,235.) Aconditionofprobationwillnotbeheld $  invalidunlessit:(1)hasnorelationshiptothecrimeofwhichtheoffenderwas &"" convicted;(2)relatestoconductwhichisnotinitselfcriminal;and(3)requiresorforbids ($$ conductwhichisnotreasonablyrelatedtofuturecriminality."(Peoplev.Lent(1975)15 *&& Cal.3d481,486;Peoplev._Balestra_(1999)76_Cal.App_.4th57,65.) ,((   Thestandardofappellatereviewofachallengedprobationconditionisabuseof  discretion.(Peoplev._Carbajal_,supra,10Cal.4that1121;Peoplev._Balestra_,supra,76  _Cal.App_.4that65.)    Manydifferentprobationconditionshavebeenapprovedunderthisstandard.   (See,e.g.,Peoplev.Lindsay(1992)10_Cal.App_.4th1642,16441645[abstinencefrom   alcoholforprobationerconvictedofsaleofcocaine];Peoplev._Delvalle_(1994)26   _Cal.App_.4th869,878879[ordertostayawayfromplaceswherechildrencongregate   becauseprobationerwasconvictedofattemptingtopurchaseachild];Peoplev.Beach  (1983)147_Cal.App_.3d612,623624[requiringtheprobationertoperformcommunity  service];Peoplev._McDowell_Ԁ(1976)59_Cal.App_.3d807,812814[requirementthatpurse  snatcherwearleathershoeswithmetaltapsonheels].)    Iftheprobationconditionprohibitsotherwiselegalactivity,andisnotreasonably  relatedtothecrimecommittedortofuturecriminality,itwillbedeclaredinvalid.(See  Peoplev._Fritchey_Ԁ(1992)2_Cal.App_.4th829,835837[invalidatingrequirementthat  probationerforfeithistruckbecausetherecordshowedthatthecourtimposedthis   conditiontopunishtheprobationer,andownershipofatruckisnotcriminalandnot " reasonablyrelatedtofuturecriminality];Peoplev._Hackler_(1993)13_Cal.App_.4th1049, $  1060[requiringtheprobationertowear,atalltimes,atshirtannouncinghisconviction &"" fortheftwastooincidentaltofuturecriminalitytobereasonable].)  ($$ Ѐ   2.ConditionsAffectingConstitutionalRights  H     Aprobationconditionthatinfringesuponconstitutionalrightsissubjecttospecial  scrutiny.Suchaconditionmustbenarrowlydrawnandconstitutetheleastrestrictive  meanstoservethedualpurposesofrehabilitationandprotectingpublicsafety.(Peoplev.   Pointer(1984)151_Cal.App_.3d1128,1139;InreWhite,supra,97_Cal.App_.3dat148.)     _Overbroad_Ԁrestrictionsuponadefendant'sconstitutionalrightsarenotpermitted.   (Peoplev.Pointer,supra,151_Cal.App_.3dat11361141[invalidatingconditionagainst   conceivingchildren];Peoplev.Beach,supra,147_Cal.App_.3dat620623[invalidating  conditionofbanishmentfromcommunitywheredefendantlived];InreWhite,supra,97  _Cal.App_.3dat145152[invalidatingconditionpreventingconvictedprostitutefrombeing  indesignatedareaofcityatanytime];Peoplev.Lopez(1998)66_Cal.App_.4th615,629  630[conditionthatprobationerrefrainfromdisplayinggangrelatedindiciadeclared  _overbroad_Ԁandmodifiedtodisplayingindiciaknownbyprobationertohaveagang  connotation].)    Properlytailoredrestrictionsuponadefendant'sconstitutionalrightsare   permissible.(Peoplev._Wardlow_(1991)227_Cal.App_.3d360,366367[upholding " conditionrequiringsubmissiontosearcheswithoutawarrantandmandatingrandomdrug $  testing];Peoplev.Miller(1989)208_Cal.App_.3d1311,13141316[upholdingcondition &"" requiringpolygraphtestingforadefendantconvictedofachildsexcrime];Peoplev. ($$ Lopez,supra,66_Cal.App_.4thatpp.628629[conditionprohibitingassociationwith *&& knowngangmembers].) ,((   Conditionswhicharevagueviolateaprobationersdueprocessrighttofairand  adequatenotice.(InreAngelJ.(1992)9_Cal.App_.4th1096,1102[conditionthatjuvenile  probationermustmaintain satisfactorygradesdeclaredvague];Peoplev.Lopez,supra,  66_Cal.App_.4thatpp.631635[conditionprohibitingaprobationerfromassociatingwith    gangmemberswasunconstitutionallyvague,butmodifiedbyinsertingthegang   definitionassetforthinPenalCodesection186.22,subdivisions(e)(f)].)     Whilenocasewasfoundthatspecificallyannouncesthestandardofappellate   reviewforchallengestoprobationconditionsthatinfringeonconstitutionalrights,it  wouldseemthatthesecasesshouldberevieweddenovo.(SeePeoplev._Cromer_(2000)  24Cal.4th889,899900[mixedquestionsoflawandfactrevieweddenovo].)     3.JailTermasaConditionofProbation      Acourtmayimposeasaconditionofprobationarequirementthatthedefendant  beimprisonedinthecountyjailforuptoatotalofoneyear.(Pen.Code,19.2,1203.1,  _subd_.(a)(2).)Thejailconditionisnotregardedaspunishment,butaspartofthe  supervisedplanofrehabilitation.(Peoplev._Brasley_(1974)41_Cal.App_.3d311,315.)A   defendantmayvoluntarilywaivetheoneyearlimit,however,givingthecourtsome " flexibility"inthosecaseswhereaoneyeartermoflocalconfinementseems $  inappropriatelybriefandaprisoncommitmentundulyharsh."(Peoplev.Bailey(1983) &"" 140_Cal.App_.3d828,831,followingPeoplev.Johnson(1978)82_Cal.App_.3d183,187 ($$ 188.) *&&  ,(( Ї   4.AppealingImpositionofProbationCondition/Waiver      Ifthedefendantconsiderstheproposedconditionsofprobationtobeundulyharsh,  heorshemayrefuseprobationandchooseinsteadtoservethesentence,thenchallenge   thelegalityoftheproposedconditionsonappeal.(Peoplev.Hodgkin(1987)194   _Cal.App_.3d795,808809.)Ontheotherhand,ifthedefendantchoosesinsteadtoaccept   thetermsofprobation,thisdoesnotprecludealegalchallengetothevalidityofthe   conditionsonappealfromtheordergrantingprobation.(Peoplev.Miller,supra,208  _Cal.App_.3dat1314;InreWhite,supra,97_Cal.App_.3dat146.)    However,trialcounselmustobjectatsentencingtopreserveissuesforappeal.  Failuretoobjecttothereasonablenessofaprobationconditionatsentencingwaivesany  challengetotheconditiononappeal.(Peoplev.Welch,supra,5Cal.4that235.)    Failuretoobjectmightnot,however,barappellatereviewofapurequestionsof  law thatcanberesolvedwithoutreferencetotheparticularsentencingrecorddeveloped  inthetrialcourtB.` hp x (#XB.(Peoplev.Welch,supra,atp.235;seealsoPeoplev.Welch,supra,at   pp.240241(Arabian,J.,concurring);InreJustinS.(2001)93_Cal.App_.4th811,815 " [juvenileprobationermaychallengeoverlyvagueprobationconditionforfirsttimeon $  appeal];butseePeoplev.Gardiner(2000)79_Cal.App_.4th148,151152[claimsthat &"" probationconditionsareunconstitutionallyvaguemustbepreservedbyanobjectionat ($$ sentencing].)# {T# { *&&    ,(( Ї%  F.0  Restitution/CostofProbation ar%(#(#   Courtsareobligatedtoimposearestitutionfineontheprobationer(between$100  and$1000formisdemeanorconvictionandbetween$200and$10,000forfelony   conviction)unlessitfindscompellingandextraordinaryreasonsnottodoso.(Pen.Code,   1202.4,_subd_.(b)(1).)Anycompellingorextraordinaryreasonfoundbythecourtmust   bestatedontherecord.Inabilitytopay shallnotbeconsideredacompellingand   extraordinaryreason.(Pen.Code,1202.4,_subd_._(c_).)    Noseparatehearingandnoexpressfindingsbythecourtareprocedurallyrequired  indeterminingtheamountoftherestitutionfine.(Pen.Code1202.4,_subd_.(d).)    Acourtmayalsorequireadefendanttopaythecostsofprobationorthecostsof  confinementinacountyjail,providedthatthecourtholdsahearinganddeterminesthat  thedefendanthastheabilitytopay.(Pen.Code,1203.1,_subd_.(b),1203.1b,1203.1c.)    Thoughrestitutionfinesaremandatorilyimposed,courtshavediscretionwhether  toimposeprobationcosts.Beforeprobationcostsmaybeimposed,however,   probationersmustbeinformedoftheirrighttoahearingandajudicialdeterminationof " abilitytopay.Anywaiveroftheseproceduresbytheprobationermustbeknowingand $  intelligent.(Pen.Code1203.1b;Peoplev.OConnell(2003)107_Cal.App_.4th1062, &"" 10671068;Peoplev.Hall(2002)103_Cal.App_.4th889,892893.) ($$   Whileaprobationermaybeorderedtopayprobationcosts,paymentofthesecosts *&& cannotbeaconditionofprobation.Thusfailuretopayprobationcostscannotbe ,(( consideredaviolationofprobationconditions.(Peoplev.Hall,supra,103Cal.App.4that  p.892;Peoplev.OConnell,supra,107_Cal.App_.4thatp.1068.)    Unauthorizedsentencingerrorscanberaisedforthefirsttimeonappealwithout  objectionatsentencing.Thus,arestitutionfinethatexceedsthestatutorymaximumcan   bereviewedandreversedonappealevenifnoobjectionwasmadeatsentencing.(People   v.Blackburn(1999)72_Cal.App_.4th1520,1534.)     %  G.0  ConvictionSetAsideuponCompletionofProbation ar1 (#(#   Ifthedefendantsuccessfullyfulfillsalltheconditionsofprobationfortheentire  periodofprobation,heorsheisentitledtohavetheguiltypleaorconvictionwithdrawn  orsetasidebythecourtandtheaccusationsorinformationdismissed.(Pen.Code,  1203.4,_subd_.(a).)Thedefendantisthenreleasedfromallpenaltiesanddisabilities  resultingfromtheoffenseofwhichheorshehasbeenconvicted.(Ibid.)However,the  priorconvictionmaystillbepledandproven(e.g.forenhancement)inasubsequentcase.  (Peoplev.Bradley(1967)248_Cal.App_.2d887.)Also,thedefendantmust disclosethe  convictioninresponsetoanydirectquestioncontainedinanyquestionnaireorapplication   forpublicoffice,for_licensure_Ԁbyanystateorlocalagency,orforcontractingwiththe " CaliforniaStateLottery.(Pen.Code1203.4,_subd_.(a).) $    Lastly,Section1203.4ofthePenalCodedoesnotrelievethedefendantof &""  _nonpenal_Ԁrestrictionsadoptedforprotectionofpublicsafetyandwelfare.(Peoplev. ($$ Vasquez(2001)25Cal.4th1225,12301231.)  *&& %  Ԁ    `    VIOLATIONANDREVOCATIONOFPROBATION ar8     %  A.0  Introduction ar79(#(#   PenalCodesection1203.2,_subd_.(a),permitsatrialcourttorevokeprobation"if   theinterestsofjusticesorequireandthecourt,initsjudgment,hasreasontobelieve...   thatthepersonhasviolatedanyoftheconditionsofhisorherprobation,hasbecome   abandonedtoimproperassociatesoraviciouslife,orhassubsequentlycommittedother   offenses,regardlesswhetherheorshehasbeenprosecutedforsuchoffense."    %  B.0  DueProcessRights ar;Ԁ(#(#    1.Background are<    Thelossoflibertyentailedintherevocationofprobationisaseriousdeprivation  requiringthatthedefendantbeaccordedcertaindueprocessrights.Theminimumdue  processrequirementsforaprobationrevocationproceedingare:(1)writtennoticeofthe  claimedviolationofprobation;(2)disclosureoftheevidenceagainsttheprobationer;(3)  anopportunitytobeheardinpersonandtopresentwitnessesanddocumentaryevidence;   (4)therighttoconfrontandcrossexamineadversewitnesses(unlessthehearingofficer " specificallyfindsgoodcausefornotallowingconfrontation);(5)aneutralanddetached $  hearingbody;and(6)awrittenstatementbythefactfinderastotheevidencereliedon &"" andthereasonsforrevokingprobation.(_Gagnon_Ԁv._Scarpelli_Ԁ(1973)411U.S.778,786.) ($$   In_Gagnon_,supra,411U.S.atpp.781782,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourt *&& applieditsparolerevocationdueprocessjurisprudencetoprobationrevocation.Parole ,(( revocationdueprocessrightswereestablishedin_Morrissey_Ԁv._Brewster_(1972)408U.S.  471.Before_Gagnon_wasdecided,however,TheCaliforniaSupremeCourt,inPeoplev.  Vickers(1972)8Cal.3d451,457458,hadappliedthe_Morrissey_parolerevocation  requirementstoprobation.InVickers,supra,at458,thecourtsaid: [_T]he_Ԁprecisenature   oftheproceedingsforsuch[probation]revocationneednotbeidentical[toparole   revocationproceedings]iftheyassureequivalentdueprocesssafeguards.     SubsequentCaliforniacasesconcerningthesufficientamountofdueprocess   requiredbeforeprobationmayberevokedhavereliedonVickers.Thefewthathave  indirectlyaddressedthequestionofwhether_Gagnon_requiresgreaterdueprocessthan  Vickershavedisagreed.(ComparePeoplev._Mosley_(1988)198_Cal.App_.3d1167,1173  1174[notingthat anyuncertaintyremaininginthewakeofVickersappearstohavebeen  quelledby..._Gagnon_...whichexplicitlyrequireswrittennoticeofanyclaimedviolationas  partoftheminimaldueprocessrequirementsinprobationrevocationcases]B.` hp x (#XBwithPeople  v._Buford_(1974)42_Cal.App_.3d975,981[whichcontinuestociteVickersand_Morrissey_  asallowingfor flexibledueprocessstandardswithoutanydueprocesssinequanons]).      2.0 ` Writtennotice dWJ"` (#` (#   B.` hp x (#XBConcerningwrittennotice,Peoplev._Mosley_,supra,198_Cal.App_.3datp.1174, $  heldthatwherethedefendantwasgivenwrittennoticeofcertaingroundsforviolation,it &"" wasimpropertobasearevocationonothergroundsnotincludedinthenotice,even ($$ thoughtheothergroundswereshownatthehearing.(SeealsoInreMoss(1985)175 *&& _Cal.App_.3d913,concerningtheimportanceofwrittennotice.)However,inPeoplev. ,(( Felix(1986)178_Cal.App_.3d1168,11711172[FirstDist.,Div.3],thecourtheldthatthe  trialcourt'soffertograntacontinuancewherethedefendantclaimedhehadnotreceived  noticeofcertaingroundsforrevocationwassufficienttomeetconstitutionalconcerns.  Felixdidnotaddress_Gagnon_,anditsrulingmaynotmeetthedueprocessstandardsof   thatcase.(SeePeoplev._Mosley_,supra,198_Cal.App_.3datpp.11731174).      3.0 ` Motionforrevocation dHP ` (#` (#   Thereisscantcaselawonthequestionofwhenamotiontorevokehasbeenmade   toolongafterthedefendantsviolationofprobationtosatisfydueprocessconcerns.  Peoplev._Villines_(1987)192_Cal.App_.3d1298,13031304,citestwofederalappellate  decisionsconcerningthetimelinessofmotionstorevokeprobation:UnitedStatesv.Tyler  (5thCir.1979)605F.2d851[dueprocessconcernsnotsatisfiedwhenthealleged  violationofprobationoccurredmorethanoneyearbeforethemotiontorevokeanda  probationofficerhadpreviouslymadeadecisionnottomakeamotion]andUnitedStates  v.Hamilton(9thCir.1983)708F.2d1412[unreasonabledelaywhenprobationwas  revokedthreeyearsaftertheviolationandthedefendantattemptedtobringthedefaultto   thecourtsattention].B.` hp x (#XB$  $AU  S#S" S3      3Uon      $AU\U݌ #S Ќ  0   4.0` (#(#Waiver dVV% ` (#` (#   Probationersdueprocessrightsmaybeexpresslywaived,andmaybedeemedto '""  havebeenwaivedifthedefendant,withknowledgeoftherights,failstoassertthemina )$$ timelymanner.(InreLaCroix(1974)12Cal.3d146,153;Peoplev.Dale(1973)36  _Cal.App_.3d191,195.)      5.0 ` SummaryRevocation dX S` (#` (#   Asummaryrevocationofprobation,uponprobablecausethataviolationof   probationhasoccurred,isacceptedpractice.Summaryrevocation tollstheclockonthe   termofprobation,andissimplyadevicebywhichthedefendantmaybebroughtbefore   thecourt,andjurisdictionretained,beforeformalrevocationproceedingsbegin.(People   v._Pipitone_(1984)152_Cal.App_.3d1112,1117;Peoplev._Barkins_(1978)81_Cal.App_.3d  30,3233;Pen.Code1203.2,sub.a.)If,however,itisdeterminedatasubsequent  revocationhearingthatthedefendantdidnotviolatethetermsofprobation,thedefendant  getsbackthetimethatpassedbetweenthesummaryrevocationandthedeterminationthat  noviolation,infact,occurred.(Peoplev._Tapia_(2000)91_Cal.App_.4th738,743.)    Though_Gagnon_,supra,411U.S.at781782,wouldseemtorequirebotha L preliminaryhearingandafinalrevocationhearingbeforeprobationmayberevoked, L Peoplev.Coleman(1975)13Cal.3d867,895,heldthat aunitaryhearingwillusually !L sufficeinprobationrevocationcasestoservethepurposesoftheseparatepreliminaryand #L formalrevocationhearingsoutlinedin_Morrissey_.B.` hp x (#XB p      x   %L!        6.RighttoCounsel d` O*%$   Thereisnoabsolutedueprocessrighttocounselinprobationrevocation   proceedings.(_Gagnon_,supra,411U.S.at790.)Ontheotherhand,thereare"casesin  whichfundamentalfairnessthetouchstoneofdueprocesswillrequirethattheState  provideatitsexpensecounselforindigentprobationersorparolees."(Ibid.)Although   therearenorigidguidelines,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourthassuggestedthatcounsel   shouldbeprovidedanytimethedefendantmakes   8  8`   atimelyand_colorable_Ԁclaim(_i_)thathehasnotcommittedthe S  allegedviolationoftheconditionsuponwhichheisatliberty; S  or(ii)that,eveniftheviolationisamatterofpublicrecordor S isuncontested,therearesubstantialreasonswhichjustifiedor S mitigatedtheviolationandmakerevocationinappropriate, S andthatthereasonsarecomplexorotherwisedifficultto S developorpresent.(Ibid.)S` x` x   InCalifornia,however,theSupremeCourthasproclaimedarighttocounselin V probationrevocationproceedingsasajudiciallydeclaredruleofprocedure.(Vickers, V supra,8Cal.3dat461462.) V    7.StandardofProof/Review obg !L   Thestandardofproofapplicabletoprobationrevocationproceedingsisproofbya O$  preponderanceoftheevidence.(Peoplev.Rodriguez(1990)51Cal.3d437,441.) O&!    Inordertooverturnatrialcourtdecisionthatthedefendantviolatedthetermsof (#" probation,anappellatecourtwoulddetermine,lookingattherecordinthelightmost *%$ favorabletotheprosecution,whethertherecord disclosessubstantialevidence!thatis, ,'& evidencewhichisreasonable,credible,andofsolidvalue!suchthatareasonabletrierof  factcouldfindthatthedefendantviolatedthetermsofprobation.(Peoplev.Johnson  (1980)26Cal.3d557,578.)B.` hp x (#XB    % ! C.0  EvidentiaryIssues obk S(#(#    1.Hearsay ob l V    Documentaryevidence,whosesourceisnotlivetestimony,maybeadmittedwhen   itisaccompaniedbyreasonableindiciaofreliability.(Peoplev._Maki_(1985)39Cal.3d   707,716[defendantssignatureonacarrentalinvoiceseizedfromdefendantshome];  Peoplev._Arreola_Ԁ(1994)7Cal.4th1144,11561157.)However,adifferentruleapplies  totestimonialhearsay.Anyattemptbytheprosecutiontointroduceapreliminaryhearing  transcriptinlieuoflivewitnesstestimonyrequiresashowingof goodcausebeforea  defendant'srightofconfrontationataprobationrevocationhearingcanbedispensed  with....(Peoplev._Maki_,supra,39Cal.3dat714716.)    TheCaliforniaSupremeCourthasheldthatitisimpropertorevokeprobation L baseduponhearsaystatementsofthesolepercipientwitnesstotheclaimedviolation !L wheretherehasbeennoshowingofthewitness'slegalunavailabilityandnospecific #L findingofgoodcausetodenytherighttoconfrontandcrossexaminewitnesses.(People %L!  v._Winson_(1981)29Cal.3d711,719;Peoplev._Arreola_,supra,7Cal.4thatp.1159.) 'L#"   InPeoplev._Arreola_,supra,7Cal.4thatpp.11581159,thecourtstated: O*%$   0 ` Ifthe_declarant_Ԁisavailableandthesame,'&` (#` (#   0 ` informationcanbepresentedtothetrier% O %Os% P %Pt` (#` (#   0 ` offactintheformoflivetestimony,withS` (#` (#   0 ` fullcrossexaminationandtheopportunitytoV` (#` (#   0 ` viewthedemeanorofthe_declarant_,thereis` (#` (#   0 ` littlejustificationforrelyingontheweaker L` (#` (#   0 ` version.WhentwoversionsofthesameevidenceO ` (#` (#   0 ` areavailable,longstandingprinciplesofthe ` (#` (#   0 ` lawofhearsay,% Q %Qvapplicableaswellto E ` (#` (#   0 ` ConfrontationClauseanalysis,favorH ` (#` (#   0 ` thebetterevidence.s ` (#` (#   InPeoplev.OConnell,supra,107_Cal.App_.4that10661067,thecourtattributed >  noerrortothetrialcourtsdecisiontoallowintoevidencean AdultDrugProgram >  TerminationReportpreparedby...theprogrammanager...toshowthatthedefendant > hadfailedtosatisfactorilyparticipateindrugcounselingsessionsasrequiredbytheterms > ofprobation.Thecourtanalogizedthisreporttothe documentaryevidence_Maki_prong > ofthe_Arreola_hearsayanalysis,determiningthatthereport wasprepared > contemporaneouslyto,andspecificallyfor,thehearingwhereappellant'slackof > compliancewiththedeferredentryofjudgmentprogramwasatissue,and suchreports  > wereroutinelyreceivedwithoutundertakingtheaddedburdenofcallingtheauthorto "> authenticateitbecausethereportswerepreparedinresponsetoareferralfromthecourt. $>  B.` hp x (#XB(Peoplev.OConnell,supra,107_Cal.App_.4thatpp.10661067.)  &>" B.` hp x (#XBM   2.ExclusionaryRule s} S   Generally,theexclusionaryruledoesnotapplytoprobationrevocation V  proceedings.(Peoplev.Harrison(1988)199_Cal.App_.3d803,808.)However,evidence V  thathasbeenpreviouslysuppressedatapreliminaryhearingbecauseofanillegalsearch V  orseizuremaynotbeintroducedataprobationrevocationhearingifthecriminalcharges V  weredroppedandanewcomplaintorindictmentwasneverfiled.(Peoplev.Zimmerman V  (1979)100_Cal.App_.3d673,676[statutoryinterpretationofPen.Code1538].)B.` hp x (#XB V   Illegallyseizedevidencewillbeexcluded,moreover,ifthepoliceconductwasso  egregiousastoshocktheconscience.(Peoplev.Washington(1987)192_Cal.App_.3d  1120,1128.)     3.Probationerstestimony si L   Thetestimonyofaprobationerataprobationrevocationhearing,anditsfruits, O cannotbeusedinalatercriminalprosecution.(Peoplev.Coleman,supra,13Cal.3dat O  891892.)However,iftheprobationertakesthestandatalatercriminaltrial,theearlier O" revocationhearingtestimonycanbeusedtoimpeachtheprobationerstruthfulness. O$ (Id.atp.892.) &!   H+&$ Ї   4.CollateralEstoppel sӄ S   Thedoctrineofcollateralestoppeldoesnotgenerallyapplytoissuesraisedinboth V  probationrevocationhearingsandcriminaltrials.Thus,factsandissuesmaybere V  litigatedregardlessofwhichhearingwasheldfirstandwhatdeterminationwasmade. V  (_Lucido_Ԁv.SuperiorCourt(1990)51Cal.3d335,347349.)Likewise,refilingofamotion V  torevokeprobation,followingdismissalofthefirstrevocationproceeding,ispermissible. V  (Peoplev._Villines_,supra,192_Cal.App_.3dat1305.) V   Itiswithinthereasonablediscretionofthetrialcourttodecidewhethertoholda  revocationhearingbeforeoraftertrialforanewoffense.(Peoplev.Jasper(1983)33  Cal.3d931,935.)    % " D.0  RevocationforFailuretoPayRestitution sL(#(#   Probationmaynotberevokedforfailuretocomplywithaconditionrequiring O paymentofarestitutionfine"unlessthecourtdeterminesthatthedefendanthaswillfully O  failedtopayandhastheabilitytopay."(Pen.Code,1203.2,_subd_.(a).)Principlesof O" equalprotectionprohibitimprisonmentofanindigentdefendantbecauseofinabilityto O$ payafine,evenifthefinewasimposedasaconditionofprobation.(InreAngelE. O&!  (1986)177_Cal.App_.3d415,420.) O(#"    ,E(& Ї% # E.  SentencingUponAFindingofProbationViolation sB S    1.0 ` OriginalSentenceImposed,NotExecuted(ExecutionofSentence V  Suspended:ESS) sԀV ` (#` (#   Atthetimeprobationisgranted,thetrialcourtmayeitherimposeaprisonterm  L andstayitsexecutionduringtheperiodofprobation,orsuspendtheimpositionof L  sentence.(Pen.Code,1203.1,_subd_.(a).)Underthefirstscenario(ESSprobation)the L  suspendedsentenceisimmediatelyappealableeventhoughithasnotgoneintoeffect. L  (Pen.Code,1237,sub.(a).)Thedefendantmaynotwaittoappealerrorsintheoriginal L sentenceuntilafterprobationisrevoked.(Peoplev._Preyer_(1985)164_Cal.App_.3d568, L 576.) L   Ifthedefendant'sprobationissubsequentlyrevokedandnotreinstated,thenthe O trialcourtmust"orderthatthejudgmentpreviouslypronouncedbeinfullforceandeffect O andthatthedefendantbecommittedtothecustodyoftheDirectorofCorrectionsforthe O termprescribedinthatjudgment."(RulesofCourt,rule4.435,_subd_.(b)(2).)Thus,ifthe O! trialcourtrevokesandterminatesprobation,thecourtcannotmodifytheoriginally O# imposedsentence.(Peoplev._Colado_(1995)32_Cal.App_.4th260,262263;Peoplev. O%   Howard(1997)16Cal.4th1081,10871088.) O'"!   AfterrevokingdefendantsESSprobation,however,thetrialcourtmaychoseto  reinstateandmodifythetermsofprobation.(Peoplev.Medina(2001)89_Cal.App_.4th  318,322323.)     Thecourtneednotstatereasonsforrefusingtoreinstateprobationwhenthe  S executionofthesentencehasbeensuspended.(Peoplev._Latham_(1988)206_Cal.App_.3d  S 27,30.) S  Ӏ  2.0  OriginalSentenceNotImposed(ImpositionofSentenceSuspended:_ISS_) teV (#(#   Ontheotherhand,ifimpositionofthesentencewaspreviouslysuspended,the L trialjudgemustpronouncesentenceatthetimeofrevocation,basingthelengthofthe L prisontermsolelyuponthecircumstancesexistingatthetimeprobationwasoriginally L granted.(Peoplev.Goldberg(1983)148_Cal.App_.3d1160;RulesofCourt4.435,_subd_. L (b)(1).)Theruleonlyreferstothelengthoftheterm(i.e.,aggravated,mitigated,or L midterm).Eventssubsequenttotheoriginalgrantofprobationmaybeconsideredin L determiningwhethertoreinstatethedefendantsprobationorimposeaprisonsentence. L (Peoplev.White(1982)133_Cal.App_.3d677,680682.) !L   Thecourtisalsopermittedtoconsidereventsthatoccurredaftertheinitialgrantof O$ probationandpriortothereinstatementofprobationindeterminingthelengthofa O&!  sentence.(Peoplev.Harris(1991)226_Cal.App_.3d141,145.)AstheHarriscourtstated: O(#"   0 ` Weconcludethat(RuleofCourt435,*%$` (#` (#   0 ` _subd_.(b)(1))allowsconsiderationof+E'%` (#` (#   0 ` circumstancesprecedinga2  _reinstatement2ٝere  _Ԁ` (#` (#   0 ` ofprobation.TherulebarsconsideringS` (#` (#   0 ` eventssubsequenttothetimeprobationV` (#` (#   0 ` wasgranted....Itdoesnotspecifically` (#` (#   0 ` addressasituationwhere,ashere,probation L` (#` (#   0 ` isgranted,revokedandthen,aspartofaO ` (#` (#   0 ` negotiateddisposition,reinstatedonmodified ` (#` (#   0 ` terms.However,reinstatingprobationon E ` (#` (#   0 ` modifiedtermsappearstobeanew2  _grant2lere  _ԀofH ` (#` (#   0 ` probationwithinthemeaningofthe ` (#` (#   0 ` rules....Thus,nothinginthelanguageofthe> ` (#` (#   0 ` rulesbarsconsideringeventspredatingaA ` (#` (#   0 ` reinstatementofprobation. ` (#` (#   0 ` (Id.atpp.145146.)B.` hp x (#XB7 ` (#` (#   Thetrialcourtmuststateitsreasonsforchoosingaparticulartermof : imprisonmentwhenimpositionofthesentencewasoriginallysuspended.(Peoplev. : Cotton(1991)230_Cal.App_.3d1072,10801081.)Furthermore,thecourtmustexpress : reasonsforchoosingimprisonmentinsteadofreinstatingprobation.(Id.atp.1081.) : Specifically, therecordmustestablishthatthetrialcourtunderstandsthattwoseparate :  anddistinctdecisionsareinvolvedinitssentencingchoice:(1)Torevokeprobation;and :" (2)tosentencetostateprisonratherthanplacethedefendantonprobationonnewor :$ modifiedconditions.(Ibid.)B.` hp x (#XB :&! ! ! X(88`  % % F.0  AppealsandWaiver te[(#(#(#    1.ObjectionstoDiscretionarySentencingChoicesWaivedby *0&!   FailuretoObject te0  0h(#(#3,'"h(#h(# Їͨ  Complaintsaboutthemannerinwhichthetrialcourtexercisesitsdiscretionin  makingsentencingchoices,orarticulatesitssupportingreasons,arewaivedforappellate  purposesifcounselfailstoobjectsatsentencing.(Peoplev.Scott,supra,9Cal.4that353.  See,e.g.,Peoplev._Zuniga_(1996)46_Cal.App_.4th81,8384[trialcourtsfailuretostate   reasonsforimposingaprisonterminsteadofreinstatingprobationormodifyingtermsis   notpreservedforappealduetotrialcounselsfailuretoobject];Peoplev.Kelley(1997)   52_Cal.App_.4th568,582[trialcounselmustobjecttothetrialcourtsfailuretoconsider   relevantmitigatingfactorstopreservetheissueforappeal];Peoplev.Bautista(1998)63  _Cal.App_.4th865,867868[trialcourtsfailuretostateadequatereasonsforrequiringsex  offenderregistrationasaconditionofprobation,whereregistrationisdiscretionary,is  waivedbylackofaspecificobjectionbytrialcounsel].)Thisruleappliestoboththe  defenseandtheprosecution.(Peoplev._Tillman_(2000)22Cal.4th300,303.)Defense  counselsfailuretoadequatelyunderstandandpursuethesentencingalternatives  favorabletothedefendantmaygiverisetoaclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.  (Peoplev.Scott,supra,9Cal.4thatp.351).TheCaliforniaSupremeCourtrecentlyre   affirmedtheScottwaiverruleinPeoplev.Gonzalez(2003)31Cal.4th745. "   Ontheotherhand,defensecounselmusthavea meaningfulopportunityto %S  objectwhichcanonlyoccurif thepartiesareclearlyapprisedofthesentencethecourt 'S"" intendstoimposeandthereasonsthatsupportanydiscretionarychoices.(Peoplev. )S$$ Scott,supra,atp.356.)InPeoplev.Gonzalez,supra.,theSupremeCourtheldthatparties +S&& havea meaningfulopportunitytoobjectwhenthetrialcourtarticulatesitssentencing -S(( decisionsduringthecourseofthesentencinghearingandpermitsobjections.Atentative  rulingisnotrequired.TheCourt,inGonzalez,disapprovedPeoplev._Middleton_(1997)  52_Cal.App_.4th19,aFirstDistrict/DivisionTwocasewhichhadrequiredatentative  rulingasaprerequisitetoScottwaiver.TheCourtdistinguishedPeoplev.Dorsey(1996)   50_Cal.App_.4th1216.Inthatcase,partiesweredeniedameaningfulopportunityto   _objectbecause_Ԁthetrialcourttookarecessimmediatelyafterimposingsentenceanddid   notgiveeitherpartyanactualopportunitytovoiceobjections.      2.UnauthorizedSentencingErrorsNotWaived te} p  S   Unauthorizedsentencingerrorsarenotwaivedbyfailuretoobjectatthetrial V court.(Peoplev.Scott,supra,atp.354;Peoplev._Mancebo_27Cal.4th735,749,fn.7.) V   % & G.0  PreSentenceCredits te(#(# 0  Ifprobationisrevoked,thecourtmustcreditanytimeL(#(# servedasaconditionofprobationagainsttheprisonterm.(Pen.Code2900.5,_subd_. O (a).)Thisincludestimespentina jail...halfwayhouse,rehabilitationfacility...orsimilar O  residentialinstitution....(Ibid.)Beforesentencing,atrialcourtmustdeterminethetotal O" numberofdaystobecreditedadefendantundersection2900.5fortimespentincustody. O$ (Pen.Code2900.5,_subd_.(d).)Whetherafacility shouldberegardedassufficiently O&!  restrictiveastoamounttocustodyconstitutesafactualquestion....(Peoplev.Ambrose O(#" (1992)7_Cal.App_.4th1917,1922.) O*%$    ,'& M( 8XXdd8r   % ' H.0  WaiverofPreSentenceCredits(JohnsonWaivers) teS(#(#   ThoughPenalCodesection19.2limitsconfinementtimeinacountyjail,imposed V  asaconditionofprobation,tooneyear,acourtcanimposemorethanoneyearincounty V  jailiftheprobationerwaivescreditsforpreviousjailtime.Thistypeofwaiveriscalleda V   Johnsonwaiver.(SeePeoplev.Johnson,supra,82_Cal.App_.3dat183.)Thus,a V  defendant mayexpresslywaiveentitlementtosection2900.5creditsagainstanultimate V  jailorprisonsentenceforpastandfuturedaysincustody.(Peoplev.Johnson(2002)28 V Cal.4th1050,105455.)Furthermore,atrialcourtmay conditionagrantorextensionof V probationuponadefendant'sexpresswaiverofpastandfuturecustodycredits.(Id.atp. V 1055.) V   However,thiswaivermustbeknowingandintelligent.(Ibid.)Theprecise  showingrequiredtoproveaknowingandintelligentwaiverofpastcreditsagainsta  futureprisontermisanissueonwhichtheCourtsofAppealaredivided.DivisionThree  oftheFirstDistrict,inPeoplev.Burks(1998)66_Cal.App_.4th232atpp.236237,held ! that awaiverofcustodycreditsispresumptivelyapplicabletoanyfuturetermof # imprisonmentunlessadefendantcanpointtoexpresslanguageontherecordshowing %  thathethoughthewouldbeabletoregaincreditsifeversenttoprison.DivisionTwo, '"" however,heldthatadefendantmust understandthefullconsequencesofhiswaiver, )$$ which shouldincludeanunderstandingoftheimpactofthatwaiverontheamountof +&& timeadefendantmaybeincarcerated.B.` hp x (#XB(Peoplev.Ambrose,supra,7Cal.App.4that  pp.19221923.)Somecourtsrequireadvisementsatthetimeofthewaiverstatingthatit  willapplyforalltimeorallpurposes,oragainstafutureprisonsentence.(See,e.g.  Peoplev.Harris(1989)195Cal.App.3d717,72126;Peoplev.Salazar(1994)29Cal.   App.4th1550,155356.)     ThisissueregardingthescopeofaJohnsonwaiver,andwhatadvisementsare S  requiredatthetimeofthewaiver,ispendingbeforetheCaliforniaSupremeCourt.The S  Courtwilldecidewhetherawaiverofpresentencecredits!madeatthetimeof S probationreinstatementinordertoavoidprison!necessarilyappliesagainstasubsequent S prisonterm.(Peoplev.Jeffrey,S105978;Peoplev.Arnold,S106444;Peoplev. S Burroughs,S116659.) S    XXX {#X ) XX XX%#XX XX )#X ) XXX## XX )#