Cal. Codes » Penal Code / PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS
California Codes

Cal. Penal Code § 19.2 (2026)

Preliminary Provisions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

In no case shall any person sentenced to confinement in a county or city jail, or in a county or joint county penal farm, road camp, work camp, or other county adult detention facility, or committed to the sheriff for placement in any county adult detention facility, on conviction of a misdemeanor, or as a condition of probation upon conviction of either a felony or a misdemeanor, or upon commitment for civil contempt, or upon default in the payment of a fine upon conviction of either a felony or a misdemeanor, or for any reason except upon conviction of a crime that specifies a felony punishment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 or a conviction of more than one offense when consecutive sentences have been imposed, be committed for a period in excess of one year; provided, however, that the time allowed on parole shall not be considered as a part of the period of confinement.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1978–2021 · leading case: United States v. Gomez-Leon, 545 F.3d 777 (9th Cir. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Gomez-Leon, 545 F.3d 777 (9th Cir. 2008). · cites it 2× “See Cal.Penal Code § 19.2 (providing that a California trial court cannot impose jail time greater than 365 days in the custody of the county sheriff as a term of probation); but see People v.”
People v. Arnold, 92 P.3d 335 (Cal. 2004). · cites it 2× “Statutory background Penal Code section 19.2 [1] has long imposed a one-year limitation on the time *843 that can be served in county jail as a condition of probation upon conviction of a felony or misdemeanor, or upon recommitment to the county jail as a condition of…”
United States v. Salazar-Mojica, 634 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2011). “Cal.Penal Code § 19.2. The government argues that because Salazar had already been sentenced to three years for the offense in 1982, the California court lacked discretion in 2009 to grant Salazar's motion for a reduction to a misdemeanor.”
People v. Davis, 25 Cal. Rptr. 3d 92 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). “273-274 ), it is less than the maximum punishment for misdemeanors, which may result in imprisonment for up to one year (Pen. Code, § 19.2), and neither the fine nor any period of confinement is mandatory.”
People v. French, 77 Cal. App. 3d 511 (Cal. Ct. App. 1978). “(a)) and vehicular manslaughter (Pen. Code, § 19.2, subd. (3)(b)). He contends on this appeal that the trial court committed prejudicial error by admitting into evidence the results of a breath alcohol test, and that there was insufficient evidence of negligence to support the…”
United States v. Solorio-Nunez, 287 F. App'x 13 (9th Cir. 2008). “Cal.Penal Code § 19.2. Solorio-Nunez’s sentence of three years imprisonment, with execution suspended, was therefore a felony sentence.”
Zulmai Nazarzai v. Cnty. of Orange (C.D. Cal. 2019). · cites it 2× “) He 17 repeatedly argued that his incarceration violated California Penal Code Section 19.2. (Dkt.”
People v. Cowan (Cal. Ct. App. 2020). “Except in situations not here relevant, under Penal Code section 19.2 “[i]n no case shall any person sentenced to confinement in a county or city jail .”
United States v. Rafael Martinez-Lopez (9th Cir. 2021). “Cal. Penal Code § 19.2 . California courts make an exception, however, where the defendant knowingly and intelligently waives the 365-day cap in order to remain in or return to county jail rather than going to prison (a “Johnson waiver”).”
United States v. Marco Luna-Diaz (9th Cir. 2010). “Cal. Penal Code § 19.2 . Thus, under § 19.”
United States v. Marco Luna-Diaz, 393 F. App'x 423 (9th Cir. 2010). “Cal.Penal Code § 19.2. Thus, under § 19.2, if a defendant violates his probation after having already served one year in jail, the trial court must either impose a prison sentence (rather than a jail sentence) or provide "a fatherly (or motherly) lecture on the evils of crime.”
People v. Hilger, 33 Cal. Rptr. 3d 135 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). “(Pen. Code, § 19.2.) 2 If the defendant thereafter violates probation, the court may exercise its discretion to reinstate probation conditioned on the defendant’s serving *1532 additional jail time — the mb being that the time the person had already spent in custody ordinarily…”
Show all 17 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.