How have courts interpreted the text of Proposition 36?

The same reasoning applies in this case. There being nothing in the text of Proposition 36 that authorizes the trial court to conduct a hearing on the constitutionality of the defendant's prior strike convictions, it is reasonable to presume the voters never intended for such hearings to take place in Proposition 36 proceedings. In this regard, we must remember courts "'may not, under the guise of construction, rewrite the law or give the words an effect different from the plain and direct import of the terms used.'" (People v. Massicot (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 920, 925.)

Recognizing the absence of textual support for his position, appellant stakes his claim primarily on constitutional grounds. Relying on People v. Allen (1999) 21

Page 6