What is the effect of deferral of judgment in a sexual assault case?

the court's rulings suggest the `whimsical disregard' of a statutory scheme. [Citation.]" (Hernandez v. Superior Court (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 285, 303, 4 Cal. Rptr.3d 883.) Although our power to direct another judge to hear a matter is not to be lightly exercised (ibid.), the totality of circumstances dictate it here.

First, the invalidity of the plea itself is a factor. It was the court's responsibility to ensure that the plea was valid, and if not, to refuse to allow it, despite agreement among the petitioner, his lawyer, and the district attorney to its terms. (See People v. Andreotti (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1263, 1275, 111 Cal.Rptr.2d 462 [where deferral of entry of judgment in molestation case requires agreement between prosecution and defendant, "[t]he trial court does not rubberstamp any agreement submitted by the parties, but protects the public by ensuring the interests of justice are served by the agreement"].) As it was, the court participated in facilitating the void plea and the commission of a new crime.

Second, there is a question as to whether the judge's indicated sentence of four years demonstrates "`an animus [toward petitioner] inconsistent with judicial objectivity.'" (Peracchi v. Superior Court (2003) 30 Cal.4th 1245, 1256-1257, 135 Cal. Rptr.2d 639, 70 P.3d 1054.) The probation report recommended jail "for an appropriate period of time" followed by an anger management program, and a combination of psychiatric, drug, alcohol, child abuse, and counseling programs as recommended by the probation department. According to the trial court declaration of petitioner's lawyer, the district attorney offered time served, 180 days. In addition, there was no evidence petitioner had committed any further violence after his guilty plea. His two oldest children are adults; one of them filed a declaration stating he and his siblings wanted petitioner to be free to see them. Petitioner's wife stated her children wanted to see him. She also declared he has changed for the better, she no longer fears him, and he is not contesting her requested divorce.