¶1I concur in the majority opinion insofar as it holds an applicant for probation has no right to cross-examine the Department of Corrections employees preparing the diagnostic report or to introduce expert testimony challenging the methodology they employed.
¶2I join Justice Richardson in dissenting from the majority opinion insofar as it holds that, generally, a plea bargain is impliedly conditioned on sentence being pronounced by the judge accepting the plea. I agree with Justice Richardson that “no express promise should be made by a court, the prosecutor, or defense counsel; nor should such a condition in the usual case be routinely implied.” (Ante.)
¶3*759I further dissent from the majority opinion insofar as it reverses the judgment and remands the cases for further proceedings in accordance with the views expressed therein, viz., that “defendant is entitled to be sentenced by Judge London, or if internal court administrative practices render that impossible, then in the alternative defendant should be permitted to withdraw his plea.” (Ante, p. 757.)
¶4There was substantial compliance with the plea bargain. The bargain provided in pertinent part that defendant would be referred to the Department of Corrections for preparation of a diagnostic report under the provisions of section 1203.03 of the Penal Code, and that the judge would follow the recommendation made in the report in sentencing defendant.
¶5I would accordingly affirm the judgment.
¶6"[The court:] The obligation which has been placed on the Court by this bargain is that 1 could not send you directly to State prison; rather. I would send you to the State prison under the provisions of Penal Code Section 1203.03. That provides for a 90-day diagnostic study and report offered to me from the Department of Corrections, and that report usually concludes with the recommendation as to whether or not you should go to the State prison for the rest of your term. I have agreed, as has your attorney, Mr. Kenner, that before 1 could send you to the State prison. I would have to get that 90-day diagnostic study and 1 would follow the recommendation. Do you understand that?
¶7“The defendant: Yes, sir.
¶8“The court: And the other charges against you would be dismissed. Do you understand that?
¶9“The defendant: Yes, sir.
¶10“The court: Do you understand there have been no other promises made?
¶11“The defendant: Yes, sir.
¶12“The court: Do you know what the charge of a violation of Penal Code Section 217 carries insofar as a State prison sentence?
¶13“The defendant: Yes, sir.
¶14“The court: What is that?
¶15“The defendant: 1 to 14.
¶16“The court: Do you know there is a vety distinct possibility that that is the sentence you will get as a result of this plea?
¶17“The defendant: Yes, sir.
¶18“The court: You still want to enter your plea?
¶19“The defendant: Yes, sir.” (Italics added.)