P. v. Parsons
Filed 5/30/13 P. v. Parsons 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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
(San
Joaquin)
----
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
WILLIAM PERCY PARSONS,
Defendant and Appellant.
C070946
(Super. Ct. No.
SF118460A)
In this
one-issue appeal, defendant William Percy Parsons correctly contends the minute
order of sentencing and the abstract of judgment must be corrected to reflect
the amount of fines and fees the judge orally imposed at sentencing ($280 total
as orally pronounced by the judge instead of the $290 total as recorded by the
clerk, the discrepancy being a $10 increase in the amount of the restitution
fund collection fee in the written documents).
The People disagree. They argue
that since the judge signed the minute order, he was “exercising his judicial
discretion†by increasing the fee by $10.
The
People’s argument is contrary to law. “Where
there is a discrepancy between the oral pronouncement of judgment and the
the oral pronouncement controls.†(
380, 385.)
DISPOSITION
The
judgment is affirmed. The clerk is
directed to correct the minute order of sentencing and the abstract of judgment
to reflect a $10 restitution fund collection fee instead of a $20 fee. The clerk is further directed to forward a
certified copy of the corrected abstract of judgment to the
ROBIE , J.
We concur:
HULL , Acting P. J.
MURRAY ,
J.
