P. v. Gaugush
Filed 6/18/13 P. v. Gaugush CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
California
Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or
relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as
specified by rule 8.1115(b). This
opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for
purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF
APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE
DISTRICT
(Butte)
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
CHRISTOPHER GAUGUSH,
Defendant and Appellant.
C072361
(Super. Ct. Nos.
CM035918 & CM036800)
Appointed
counsel for defendant Christopher Walter Gaugush asked this court to review the
record to determine whether there are any arguable
issues on appeal. (
436 (Wende).) We will modify the judgment to include a
parole revocation fine of $240 in each of the matters from which defendant has
appealed. Finding no other arguable
error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will
affirm the judgment.
I
The matter
here was resolved by plea and without a probation report. Accordingly, the facts are taken from the
factual basis to which the parties stipulated in the trial court.
In February
2012, defendant entered the Walgreen’s store in Chico,
California.
Inside the Walgreens, defendant “jumped†over the pharmacy counter and
stole narcotic medications. Defendant
ran from the store but was soon detained by law enforcement. Defendant was subsequently charged in
Superior Court case No. CM035918 with second degree robbery (Pen. Code,
§ 211),
title="">[1]
obstructing a peace officer (§ 148, subd. (a)(1)), and second degree
commercial burglary (§ 459). It was
further alleged that defendant served a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd.
(b)) and is required to register as a sex offender (§ 290).
In July
2012, defendant was charged in Butte County Superior Court case No. CM036800
with failing to register annually as a transient sex offender. (§ 290.011, subd. (c).)
Defendant
entered a negotiated plea to resolve both matters. He pleaded no contest to failing to register
annually as a sex offender and to second degree commercial burglary. In exchange, the remaining charges and
allegations were dismissed and the People agreed defendant would serve a
stipulated term of three years eight months in state prison. Defendant waived a referral to probation and
he was sentenced in accordance with his plea.
The trial
court ordered various fines and fees to be paid, including a $240 restitution
fine in each case. Defendant was awarded
313 days of custody credit in case No. CM035918; he received no
CM036800. Defendant appeals; his request
for a certificate of probable cause was denied.
II
Appointed
counsel filed an opening brief setting
forth the facts of the case and asking this court to review the record and
determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (Wende,
supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant
was advised by counsel of the right to file a
date of filing the opening brief. More
than 30 days elapsed and we received no communication from defendant.
At
sentencing, the trial court imposed a $240 restitution fine (§ 1202.4) in
each of the matters appealed. The court,
however, failed to impose the related $240 parole revocation fine under section
1202.45. This is an error of law which
we shall correct. (See
849, 853.) We shall modify the judgment
to reflect imposition of this fine and order the abstract of judgment amended
to reflect the same.
Having
undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that
would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
DISPOSITION
The
judgment is modified to include imposition of a $240 parole revocation fine in Butte
County case Nos. CM035918 and
CM036800. The trial court is directed to
amend the abstract of judgment accordingly and forward a certified copy of the amended
abstract of judgment to the Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation. The
judgment is affirmed as modified.
BLEASE , Acting
P. J.
We concur:
NICHOLSON , J.
MAURO , J.
name="_ftn1" title="">[1]
Undesignated statutory references
are to the Penal Code.
