P.v . Floyd
Filed 1/10/07 P.v . Floyd CA1/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ERIC JASON FLOYD, Defendant and Appellant. | A114159 (Lake County Super. Ct. No. CR908603) |
This appeal from a guilty plea concerns the propriety of a $525 drug program fee imposed as part of appellant's sentence. We affirm.
I. BACKGROUND
By information filed in March 2006, the District Attorney of Lake County charged appellant Eric Jason Floyd with possession of oxycodone for sale (Health & Saf. Code,[1] § 11351, count 1) and possession of oxycodone (§ 11350, subd. (a), count 2). The information further alleged that appellant suffered two prior prison terms. Pursuant to a negotiated disposition, appellant pleaded guilty to the first count in return for dismissal of the remaining count and the enhancements. The court sentenced appellant to the midterm of three years in state prison and also imposed a $600 restitution fine; a suspended parole revocation fine of the same amount; a $175 laboratory analysis fee plus penalty assessment (§ 11372.5); a $525 drug program fee plus penalty assessment (§ 11372.7); and a $20 court security fee. This timely appeal followed.
II. DISCUSSION
In the process of taking appellant's plea, the court advised him that in addition to the restitution fine â€
