How have courts interpreted the principle of an indicated sentence in a no contest plea?

parties to the agreement." (People v. Segura (2008) 44 Cal.4th 921, 930.) Appellant argues this principle is inapplicable because he pled no contest in case No. 18-93547 pursuant to an indicated sentence and not a plea bargain. An indicated sentence is not a promise, and leaves the court with "full discretion at the sentencing hearing to select a fair and just punishment." (People v. Clancy (2013) 56 Cal.4th 562, 575, 576.) Although the record largely supports appellant's characterization, there is some ambiguity.⁴ We need not resolve the point, however, because we would find appellant entitled to relief even under respondent's view of the nature of the plea.