Because the tolling triggered by summary revocation does not keep a probation term from running, the Court of Appeal reversed the probation revocation order, finding that appellant’s probation had ended by operation of law when AB 1950 took effect, eight days before he committed the purported violation. The Court further held that appellant’s agreement to extend his probation as part of a negotiation disposition did not estop him from invoking the benefit offered by AB 1950.
^