Except where the defendant is statutorily ineligible for suspension of any part of the sentence,when imposing a term of imprisonment in county jail under section 1170(h), the court must suspend execution of a concluding portion of the term to be served as a period of mandatory supervision unless the court finds, in the interests of justice, that mandatory supervision is not appropriate in a particular case. Because section 1170(h)(5)(A) establishes a statutory presumption in favor of the imposition of a period of mandatory supervision in all applicable cases, denials of a period of mandatory supervision should be limited.
(Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2017.)
In determining that mandatory supervision is not appropriate in the interests of justice under section 1170(h)(5)(A), the court’s determination must be based on factors that are specific to a particular case or defendant. Factors the court may consider include:
In exercising discretion to select the appropriate period and conditions of mandatory supervision, factors the court may consider include:
(Subd (c) amended effective January 1, 2018.)
Notwithstanding rule 4.412(a), when a court denies a period of mandatory supervision in the interests of justice, the court must state the reasons for the denial on the record.
Cal. R. Ct. 4.415
Advisory Committee Comment
Penal Code section 1170.3 requires the Judicial Council to adopt rules of court that prescribe criteria for the consideration of the court at the time of sentencing regarding the court’s decision to “[d]eny a period of mandatory supervision in the interests of justice under paragraph (5) of subdivision (h) of Section 1170 or determine the appropriate period of and conditions of mandatory supervision.”
Subdivision (a). Penal Code section 1170(h)(5)(A): “Unless the court finds, in the interests of justice, that it is not appropriate in a particular case, the court, when imposing a sentence pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2) of this subdivision, shall suspend execution of a concluding portion of the term for a period selected at the court’s discretion.” Under People v. Borynack (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 958, review denied, courts may not impose mandatory supervision when the defendant is statutorily ineligible for a suspension of part of the sentence.
Subdivisions (b)(3), (b)(4), and (c)(3). The Legislature has declared that “[s]trategies supporting reentering offenders through practices and programs, such as standardized risk and needs assessments, transitional community housing, treatment, medical and mental health services, and employment, have been demonstrated to significantly reduce recidivism among offenders in other states.” (Pen. Code, ยง 17.7(a).)
Subdivision (c)(7). Under Penal Code section 1170(h)(5)(B), defendants serving a period of mandatory supervision are entitled to day-for-day credits: “During the period when the defendant is under such supervision, unless in actual custody related to the sentence imposed by the court, the defendant shall be entitled to only actual time credit against the term of imprisonment imposed by the court.” In contrast, defendants serving terms of imprisonment in county jails under Penal Code section 1170(h) are entitled to conduct credits under Penal Code section 4019(a)(6).
Subdivision (c)(8). Standard 4.35 of the California Standards of Judicial Administration provides courts with additional guidance on using the results of a risk/needs assessment at sentencing.