Does a defendant who accepts a plea agreement for reduced sentence for a charge of assault have any right to challenge the award on appeal?

During the plea and sentencing hearing, there was an unreported discussion at the bench after the court raised the issue of credits. Following the discussion, the court announced a modified disposition which included a stipulated sentence for an aggregate term of five years, reducing the original agreement for eight years. The court also stated: "However, [defendant] does not have time credits on this case here because he is serving a sentence and has been on the New Jersey case but he will start getting credits from today." Defendant said he understood the consequences of his plea and had discussed the case fully with his attorney; he then pled no contest to the agreed-upon offense and enhancement, requested immediate sentencing and waived a probation report, which would have set forth any prejudgment custody to which defendant was entitled (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.411.5(a)(11)). Because defendant accepted a plea agreement for a reduced sentence and agreed to receive no presentence custody credits, he has "received the benefit of [his] bargain [and] should not be allowed to trifle with the courts by

Page 8

attempting to better the bargain through the appellate process." (People v. Hester (2000) 22 Cal.4th 290, 295.)

Further, by accepting the award and failing to object at sentencing, defendant has forfeited his right to challenge and raise the question of whether he was entitled to presentence custody credits on appeal. (See People v. Myers (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 305, 311-312 [defendant who, through counsel, stipulated to the amount of presentence custody credits forfeited any alleged error in calculation].)